Download PDF
Int J Angiol 2016; 25(05): e21-e24
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1371761
Case Report
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Shining Pearls Sign: A New Identity for Venous Malformations on Computed Tomographic Imaging

Venkatraman Bhat
1   Department of Radiology, Narayana Health and Mazumdar Shaw Cancer Center, Bengaluru, India
,
Varun Bhat
2   Department of Radiology, Imaging services and Mazumdar Shaw Cancer Center, Bengaluru, India
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
01 August 2014 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Vascular malformations, in particular venous malformations (VM), are common lesions involving the pediatric and adolescent population. VM occur at approximately 1:5,000 to 10,000; approximately 40% of them occur in the head and neck regions. Classical appearance of VM on imaging is a demonstration of near-normal–sized or mildly dilated feeding arteries which subsequently lead to dilated venous structures of varying caliber, thus constituting the malformation. Phleboliths are the hallmark of VM. Plain radiography has been an established modality for demonstrating phleboliths. The emergence of computed tomographic (CT) as a preferred imaging modality for the evaluation of a complex vascular malformation necessitates familiarity with the spectrum of CT appearances of this lesion. This presentation illustrates an additional CT sign, “shining pearls sign,” highlighting the striking display of phleboliths in the vascular malformations, prompting correct diagnosis.

Keywords

venous malformation - shining pearls sign - phlebolith - CT
 

  • References

  • 1 Baer AH, Parmar HA, DiPietro MA, Kasten SJ, Mukherji SK. Hemangiomas and vascular malformations of the head and neck: a simplified approach. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2011; 21 (3) 641-658 , viii
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Zheng JW, Mai HM, Zhang L , et al. Guidelines for the treatment of head and neck venous malformations. Int J Clin Exp Med 2013; 6 (5) 377-389
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Harnsberger HR. Diagnostic imaging. Head and neck. Salt Lake City, UT: Amirsys; 2004
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Mohan RP, Dhillon M, Gill N. Intraoral venous malformation with phleboliths. Saudi Dent J 2011; 23 (3) 161-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Scolozzi P, Laurent F, Lombardi T, Richter M. Intraoral venous malformation presenting with multiple phleboliths. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003; 96 (2) 197-200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rossiter JL, Hendrix RA, Tom LW, Potsic WP. Intramuscular hemangioma of the head and neck. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1993; 108 (1) 18-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Zengin AZ, Celenk P, Sumer AP. Intramuscular hemangioma presenting with multiple phleboliths: a case report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013; 115: e32-e36
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kakimoto N, Tanimoto K, Nishiyama H, Murakami S, Furukawa S, Kreiborg S. CT and MR imaging features of oral and maxillofacial hemangioma and vascular malformation. Eur J Radiol 2005; 55 (1) 108-112
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kim JC. Central lucency of pelvic phleboliths: comparison of radiographs and noncontrast helical CT. Clin Imaging 2001; 25 (2) 122-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Arac M, Celik H, Oner AY, Gultekin S, Gumus T, Kosar S. Distinguishing pelvic phleboliths from distal ureteral calculi: thin-slice CT findings. Eur Radiol 2005; 15 (1) 65-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dubois J, Alison M. Vascular anomalies: what a radiologist needs to know. Pediatr Radiol 2010; 40 (6) 895-905
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Legiehn GM, Heran MK. Venous malformations: classification, development, diagnosis, and interventional radiologic management. Radiol Clin North Am 2008; 46 (3) 545-597 , vi
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar