Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_2867_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Preface
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Diagnostic Approach Toward Fixed Drug Eruptions
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Hypereosinophilic Syndrome Treatment Options
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Discussion
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Alternative Diagnosis/Potential Misdiagnosis
- •Note
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Alternative Diagnosis/Potential Misdiagnosis
- •Note
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Alternative Diagnosis Considered/Potential Misdiagnosis
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Alternative Diagnoses
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Alternative Diagnoses
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Plan of Action, the Points Clinician Should Consider, Pitfalls to Avoid, and Pearls of Knowledge to Consider
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnoses
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Plan of Action, the Points Clinician Should Consider, Pitfalls to Avoid, and Pearls of Knowledge to Consider
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Case 1
- •Case 2
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Plan of Action, the Points Clinician Should Consider, Pitfalls to Avoid, and Pearls of Knowledge to Consider
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Plan of Action, the Points Clinician Should Consider, Pitfalls to Avoid, and Pearls of Knowledge to Consider
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Plan of Action, the Points Clinician Should Consider, Pitfalls to Avoid, and Pearls of Knowledge to Consider
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •The Plan of Action, Points to Consider, Pitfalls to Avoid, and Pearls of Knowledge
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Clinical Case Presentation
- •Differential Diagnosis
- •Discussion
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Introduction
- •The Lawyers Are Watching
- •Misdiagnosis Versus Missed Diagnosis
- •Prostate Cancer Misdiagnosis
- •Breast Cancer Misdiagnosis
- •Exemplar Cases
- •Cardiac Misdiagnosis
- •COVID Misdiagnosis
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Conclusion
- •References

51 Primary Mucinous Adenocarcinoma of Renal Pelvis Misdiagnosed as Calculus…
371
nephrostomy (PCN). A considerable amount of gelatinous material was drained via
a PCN catheter without urine. The catheter was blocked the second day, and PCN
was performed again. However, these methods failed to curb the patient’s fever,
and he was transferred to the hospital. Physical examination was generally normal
except for percussion tenderness in the right kidney region. Laboratory tests demonstrated elevated red (20/μL) and white blood cells (200/μL) in the urinalysis, a
decreased red blood cell count (4.29 × 1012/L) and hemoglobin concentration
(118g/L), and elevated CEA (7.89ng/mL) and CA19-9 (5.79ng/mL). HBsAg was
positive. Liver function, renal function, coagulation function, and stool routine
examination were generally normal. Chest computed tomography scan showed an
old tuberculosis scar on the right lung. The doctors suspected that he had gastrointestinal cancer and performed an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and a colonoscopy. However, nothing abnormal was found on the gastric or colonic mucosa, and
the gelatinous material collected from the PCN catheter indicated no malignancy.
Doctors diagnosed the patient with Calculus pyonephrosis and malignant tumor to
be excluded. An open radical nephrectomy was then performed. His kidney was
markedly enlarged with a thinning renal cortex. There was an unintentional spillage of gelatinous material because of the two PCN procedures. Therefore, the doctors only performed a nephrectomy without a total ureterectomy. After opening the
kidney, there were polypoids, gelatinous material, and stones lling the renal pelvis. Histologically, the tumor was detected in intestinal metaplasia and glandular
acini with multiple extracellular mucins. Immunohistochemistry revealed that
tumor markers CDX2, CEA, villin, and ki67 (60%) were positive and tumor markers CA125, MUC6, CK7, CD20, GATA3, S100P, and SATB2 were negative. The
histologic diagnosis of primary mucinous adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis was
conducted. This patient was advised to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy because of
the spillage of gelatinous material during surgery, but he refused. After 1 year of
follow-up, the patient reported no discomfort, and a computed tomography scan
indicated no sign of recurrence. Upon testing the serum tumor markers it indicated
that CEA was 3.57ng/mL depicts a timeline of the diagnosis, interventions, and
outcomes [1].
Differential Diagnosis
1. Calculus pyonephrosis—Calculus pyonephrosis and primary mucinous adenocarcinoma of renal pelvis both drain mucinous material on PCN.Histopathological
analysis can help differentiate calculus pyonephrosis from primary mucinous
adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis.
2. Ureteropelvic junction stenosis with stones in the renal pelvis—Urologist must
consider a possibility of primary mucinous adenocarcinoma of renal pelvis in
patients presenting with renal stones accompanied by severe hydronephrosis and
chronic inammation.

372
M. M. J. Shaikh
Discussion
Mucinous adenocarcinoma is usually of colorectal and ovarian origin. It is characterized by abundant mucus production [2, 3]. As seen in the patient above, percutaneous nephrostomy drained gelatinous material. Multiple renal pelvic calculi,
stenosis of the ureter, and severe hydronephrosis were seen, along with cortical
thinning. These features made it easy to diagnose Calculus pyonephrosis. PCN can
also cause iatrogenic spillage and tumor cell seeding. It is essential to be cautious
before conducting PCN for pyonephrosis and consider the possibility of malignancy. The most common presenting features are ank pain, hematuria, abdominal
mass, and discomfort. All the features except for mass do not indicate malignancy.
Out of all the total cases reported, it has been studied that only 20% of the cases
showed elevated tumor marker CEA 19-9.
Plan ofAction, thePoints Clinician Should Consider, Pitfalls
toAvoid, andPearls ofKnowledge toConsider
Taking careful history, physical examination, and measuring tumor marker levels
accompanied by CT scans can improve the diagnosis accuracy rates. Primary adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis or ureter is a rare entity. Urologists should always
have a window of suspicion whenever mucinous material is seen on a nephrostomy
tube. No standard treatment has been established so far. It has been studied for
pelvis tumor nephroureterectomy with a bladder cuff accompanied by chemotherapy can improve the prognosis [7]. No surgical procedures have been proposed for
this tumor yet. Only after a histopathological analysis, a denitive diagnosis of
primary mucinous adenocarcinoma can be made [8]. Primary mucinous adenocarcinoma has a lousy prognosis, and most of the patients die within 2–5years of
follow-up [9].
Conclusion
Although on percutaneous nephrostomy, Calculus pyonephrosis and primary mucinous adenocarcinoma drain gelatinous material, it is worth noting that it can be
differentiated. Common clinical presentation of Mucinous Adenocarcinoma are
ank pain and abdominal pain [10]. If the lesion bleeds when touched, it’s possibly
a pelvic tumor, while a lesion in pyonephrosis does not bleed easily.

51 Primary Mucinous Adenocarcinoma of Renal Pelvis Misdiagnosed as Calculus…
373
References
1. Li H, Xie F, Zhao C, Yi Z, Chen J, Zu X.Primary mucinous adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis
misdiagnosed as calculous pyonephrosis: a case report and literature review. Transl Androl
Urol. 2020;9(2):781.
2. Hugen N, Brown G, Glynne-Jones R, de Wilt JH, Nagtegaal ID. Advances in the care of
patients with mucinous colorectal cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016;13(6):361–9.
3. Morice P, Gouy S, Leary A.Mucinous ovarian carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(13):1256–66.
4. Lai C, Teng XD.Primary enteric-type mucinous adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis masquerading as cystic renal cell carcinoma: a case report and review of the literature. Pathol Res Pract.
2016;212(9):842–8.
5. Hasebe M, Serizawa S, Chino S. On a case of papillary cystadenocarcinoma following
malignant degeneration of a papillary adenoma in the kidney pelvis. Yokohama Med Bull.
1960;11:491–500.
6. Sisodia SM, Khan WA, Bhavsar SP.Incidental primary papillary mucinous adenocarcinoma of
the renal pelvis in a case of non-functioning kidney due to chronic pyelonephritis and pelvic
calculus. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2012;23:592–3.
7. Takehara K, Nomata K, Eguchi J, Hisamatsu H, Maruta S, Hayashi T, Koga S, Kanetake
H.Mucinous adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis associated with transitional cell carcinoma in
the renal pelvis and the bladder. Int J Urol. 2004;11(11):1016–8.
8. Lee HY, Jang MY, Wu WJ, Shen JT, Wang HS, Chang SF, Tsai KJ.Primary mucinous adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis. Urol Sci. 2014;25(2):65–7.
9. Ye YL, Bian J, Huang YP, Guo Y, Li ZX, Deng CH, Dai YP, Sun XZ.Primary mucinous adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis with elevated CEA and CA19-9. Urol Int. 2011;87(4):484–8.
10. Sidharth, Maskey P, Chalise PR, etal. Primary mucinous adenocarcinoma of the renal pelvis
and ureter. Nepal Med Coll J. 2011;13:229–30.

Chapter 52
Kidney Inammatory Myobroblastic
Tumor Misdiagnosed asaMetastatic
Malignancy
MariaMohammedJavedShaikh
Learning Objectives
By the end of this presentation, the clinician will be able to:
1. Create an appropriate differential diagnosis in patients presenting with symptoms of gross hematuria.
2. Evaluate clinical and radiological evidence to come up with a diagnosis of kidney inammatory myobroblastic tumor.
3. Conrm the diagnosis based on immunohistochemical and microscopic analyses.
4. Discuss the identication and early treatment of infectious causes of inammatory myobroblastic tumors of the kidney.
5. Emphasize the need for follow-up to prevent recurrence and metastasis.
Introduction
An inammatory myobroblastic tumor (IMT) is also called an inammatory pseudotumor. It is a mesenchymal tumor characterized by spindle cells from broblasts
and inltration of different types of inammatory cells [1]. Only 48 cases of IMT
have been reported so far from 1972 to 2019. The rst-ever case of IMT was reported
in 1937. From the published databases, it was reviewed that out of a total of 48 cases,
37 occurred in the renal parenchyma, and the other 11 cases occurred in the renal
pelvis. It occurs equally in both men and women. It can occur in a wide range of age
groups from 3 to 75years old. It was found that 73% of the cases occurred in the age
M. M. J. Shaikh (*)
St. Martinus University Faculty of Medicine, Willemstad, Curacao
e-mail: maria.shaikh@martinus.edu
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
H. Tohid et al. (eds.), The Misdiagnosis Casebook in Clinical Medicine,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28296-6_52
375

376
M. M. J. Shaikh
population over 40 years old. Only ve cases accounted for in children below
14years old. There is no sex predilection of this disease. The most common location
of IMT is the lungs; extrapulmonary sites include the head, neck, liver, retroperitoneum, ventricles, bladder, and spinal canal [2–10]. In the genitourinary system, the
most common site is the bladder [11]. The kidney is an unusual site for IMT.Fifty
percent of cases involve the left kidney and the remaining 50% of the cases in the
right kidney. IMT was notably found to be more commonly occurring in the upper
pole of the kidney than in the lower pole. The literature suggests that spindle cell
proliferation is reactive hyperplasia that occurs due to chronic inammation, surgery,
or trauma. However, etiological factors are still unknown. Long- standing nephrolithiasis is also suspected as one of the causes of IMT.IMT was initially thought to be
an inammatory pseudotumor. However, later research classies this as a borderline
neoplasm because it was found that spindle cells were the main part of these tumors
[1]. As per a few scholars, IMT has been redened as low-grade neoplasm. It is crucial to identify these tumors and treat them as it has a potential for metastasis, is
locally invasive, and can recur. It is challenging to diagnose it preoperatively because
it is a rare entity involving the kidneys and is often missed by the physician and misdiagnosed as a malignant disease both clinically and pathologically [4, 5]. It occurs
equally in both men and women. It can occur in a wide range of age groups. It is
more often diagnosed in children than adults of both sexes equally. However, extrapulmonary forms occur more commonly in adult women [2]. Most commonly it
clinically presents mainly as lower back pain and abdominal pain. Other clinical
presentations include hematuria, anemia, recurrent high fever, abdominal discomfort, lethargy, and weight loss. It can also be an incidental nding in imaging. The
tumor size reviewed ranged from 1.5cm to 13.5cm. In clinical practice, the rst-line
treatment is surgical resection of the lesion. In patients with bilateral masses, single
kidney, or renal insufciency, a biopsy with intraoperative pathological assessment
was highly suggested by some authors to avoid needless removal. However, it is still
disputable as the diagnosis can be made only post nephrectomy [22]. It is linked to
the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene, located on 2p53 in 50% of cases.
Fusion partners are clathrin heavy chain, tropomyosin, and ran-binding protein,
correction-genes that have been seen in patients who are ALK-positive. Fusion proteins involved with ALK-negative genes are reactive oxygen species (ROS-1) and
platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) genes [12, 13]. ALK-positive cases are more
commonly found in children. Herein, we discuss a case of renal IMT in a patient
with a history of long-standing nephrolithiasis to improve the understanding of the
disease and impart the patients with better treatment and management.
Clinical Case Presentation
A 77-year-old female with a past medical history of bilateral renal calculus for
15years was admitted to the urology department. She complained of recurrent painless gross hematuria for 1 month. At the time, doctors treated her with cephalosporin,
which was not effective. Computed tomography (CT) imaging showed a mixed

52 Kidney Inammatory Myobroblastic Tumor Misdiagnosed as a Metastatic…
density and slightly heterogeneous enhancement of the lesion in the middle pole of
the left kidney and adrenal enlargement ipsilaterally. The patient underwent surgical
treatment by retroperitoneoscopic left radical nephrectomy plus adrenalectomy. On
microscopy, a large number of typical spindle cells surrounded by plasma cells and
lymphocytes were observed. Immunohistochemical analyses indicated that these
spindle cells were positive for vimentin, cytokeratin (CK), Ki-67, CK7, cluster of
differentiation (CD) 34, and CD31 and focally positive for CD10 and anaplastic
lymphoma kinase (ALK-1). So, a denitive diagnosis of IMT was made. The patient
improved after the operation, and no recurrence or metastasis was noted during the
22-month follow-up. Laboratory investigation showed mild anemia and infection on
routine blood work, with a hemoglobin level of 10.0g/dL and a leukocyte count of
12.2×109 cells/L.On urinalysis, it showed a large number of red blood cells. Other
laboratory results were within the normal limits, and no malignant cells were noted
in three urine cytopathologic analyses. On imaging, only bilateral renal calculus was
noted on abdominal ultrasound; however, no space-occupying lesions were noted.
CT imaging showed a slightly heterogeneously enhancing mass in the middle pole
of the left kidney and an ipsilateral adrenal enlargement, which was suspected as
potential metastasis. Treatment-radical nephrectomy was performed retroperitoneoscopically on the left kidney along with adrenalectomy [1].
377
Differential Diagnosis
1. Renal cell carcinoma—IMT is a benign tumor and has little potential for metastasis; however renal cell carcinoma can spread hematogenously.
2. Angiomyolipoma—Angiomyolipoma consists of fat and muscle cells; however,
kidney IMT is composed of inammatory cells, spindle cells, and broblasts.
Moreover, angiomyolipoma has been linked to TSC1 and TSC2 genes.
3. Xanthogranuloma—Xanthogranuloma is caused by chronic nephrolithiasis and
infection. Biopsy will help differentiate xanthogranuloma from kidney IMT.
Discussion
IMT is a rare type of renal mesenchymal tumor composed mainly of spindle cells
and various inammatory cells. It can occur in a wide range of age groups between
3 and 75years [7, 8]. Seventy-three percent of the cases reported were found in
people 40years old. According to scholars, IMT can also be caused by Epstein-Barr
virus [8]; others are found to be associated with hep B virus infection [9]. Etiological
factors could be autoimmune or infectious. Some infectious causes with
Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Eikenella corrodens have also been reported [14,
15]. IMT of kidneys does not have distinctive clinical and radiological features
making it difcult to diagnose. IMT in kidneys is slow-growing, occurring in
middle- aged and elderly patients. It is usually conned to a single organ. It most

378
M. M. J. Shaikh
commonly manifests as pain and hematuria. A few cases presented with anemia,
weight loss, fever, night sweats, and thrombocytosis, all of which resolved after
treatment gradually. It is imperative to differentiate renal IMT from renal malignant
disease. It lacks distinctive radiologic features, causing misinterpretation as a malignancy. It appears as hypoechoic and intratumoral vascular distribution on ultrasound, making it difcult to differentiate from malignancy [16]. CT and magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) are better for the diagnosis of kidney masses. Cystic renal
IMT should be differentiated from cystic renal cancer [17]. The conclusion diagnosis usually depends on histopathological and immunohistochemical stains. On
immunohistochemical stain, it usually appears as spindle cells with collagen, inltrating lymphocytes, and plasma cells. The above case was misdiagnosed as malignant renal disease metastasized to the ipsilateral adrenal gland. In addition to
surgery, chemotherapy should also be used as adjuvant therapy. Radiotherapy is
mainly used in IMT involving the head and neck. It has been studied that high-dose
fractionated radiotherapy is very effective for skull and nasopharyngeal IMT [18].
For ALK-positive cases, target therapy ALK inhibitors like crizotinib can be considered [19]. For ALK-negative cases, nonsteroidal anti-inammatory drugs (NSAIDs)
have been shown to reduce the tumor size and cure the disease [20]. Antibiotics can
be used for infectious causes of IMT [21]. Corticosteroids are used in younger
patients with bilateral renal IMT.Radiotherapy is an option when NSAIDs, steroids,
and surgery fail to control IMT in the kidneys effectively.
Conclusion
The kidney is an unusual site for IMT neoplasm. Physicians need to be aware of the
possibility of IMT in the differential diagnosis while evaluating renal masses to
avoid misdiagnosis. Although IMT is not a malignant disease, it is reported to be
associated with renal cell carcinoma, which should be considered in the management and prognosis of the patient. Surgery and adjuvant target and chemotherapy
are considered to be rst-line treatments. As there is a possibility of recurrence and
metastasis, follow-up is crucial.
References
1. Zhang GH, Guo XY, Liang GZ, Wang Q.Kidney inammatory myobroblastic tumor masquerading as metastatic malignancy: a case report and literature review. World J Clin Cases.
2019;7(24):4366.
2. Attili SV, Chandra CR, Hemant DK, Bapsy PP, RamaRao C, Anupama G. Retroperitoneal
inammatory myobroblastic tumor. World J Surg Oncol. 2005;3(1):1–4.
3. Shetty SJ, Pereira T, Desai RS.Inammatory myobroblastic tumor of the oral cavity: a case
report and literature review. J Cancer Res Ther. 2019;15(3):725.

52 Kidney Inammatory Myobroblastic Tumor Misdiagnosed as a Metastatic…
4. Duan J, Wang Y.A case report of recurrent thyroid inammatory myobroblastic tumor and its
metastasis in soft tissue. Medicine. 2017;96(45).
5. Na YS, Park SG.Inammatory myobroblastic tumor of the pleura with adjacent chest wall
invasion and metastasis to the kidney: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2018;12(1):1–5.
6. Wang S, Chen L, Cao Z, Mao X, Zhang L, Wang B.Inammatory myobroblastic tumor of the
lumbar spinal canal: a case report with literature review. Medicine. 2017;96(26).
7. Heerwagen ST, Jensen C, Bagi P, Rappeport ED.Renal inammatory myobroblastic tumor:
a rare tumor indistinguishable from renal cell carcinoma—report of two cases. Acta Radiol.
2007;48(10):1143–6.
8. Dogan MS, Doganay S, Koc G, Gorkem SB, Unal E, Ozturk F, Coskun A.Inammatory myobroblastic tumor of the kidney and bilateral lung nodules in a child mimicking Wilms tumor
with lung metastases. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2015;37(6):e390–3.
9. You Y, Shao H, Bui K, Bui M, Klapman J, Cui Q, Coppola D. Epstein-Barr virus positive
inammatory pseudotumor of the liver: report of a challenging case and review of the literature. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2014;44(4):489–98.
10. Li Z, Wang W, Wang Y, Zhai X, Tian Y, Fu Y, Zhou H. Inammatory myobroblastic tumor
of the kidney with viral hepatitis B and trauma: a case report. Oncol Lett. 2013;6(6):1741–3.
11. Gwynn ES, Clark PE.Inammatory myobroblastic tumor associated with renal cell carcinoma. Urology. 2005;66(4):880–e7.
12. Surabhi VR, Chua S, Patel RP, Takahashi N, Lalwani N, Prasad SR.Inammatory myobroblastic tumors: current update. Radiol Clin. 2016;54(3):553–63.
13. Lovly CM, Gupta A, Lipson D, Otto G, Brennan T, Chung CT, Borinstein SC, Ross JS,
Stephens PJ, Miller VA, Cofn CM. Inammatory myobroblastic tumors harbor multiple
potentially actionable kinase fusions. Cancer Discov. 2014;4(8):889–95.
14. Liang W.A renal inammatory myobroblastic tumor similar to cystic renal cell carcinoma:
one case report. Medicine. 2015;94(28).
15. Androulaki A, Papathomas TG, Liapis G, Papaconstantinou I, Gazouli M, Goutas N, Bramis
K, Papalambros A, Lazaris AC, Papalambros E.Inammatory pseudotumor associated with
mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. Int J Infect Dis. 2008;12(6):607–10.
16. Lee SH, Fang YC, Luo JP, Kuo HI, Chen HC.Inammatory pseudotumour associated with
chronic persistent Eikenella corrodens infection: a case report and brief review. J Clin Pathol.
2003;56(11):868–70.
17. Ascenti G, Zimbaro G, Mazziotti S, Gaeta M, Lamberto S, Scribano E.Contrast-enhanced
power Doppler US in the diagnosis of renal pseudotumors. Eur Radiol. 2001;11(12):2496–9.
18. Song D.Inammatory myobroblastic tumor of urinary bladder with severe hematuria: a case
report and literature review. Medicine. 2019;98(1).
19. Gabel BC, Goolsby M, Hansen L.Inammatory myobroblastic tumor of the left sphenoid
and cavernous sinus successfully treated with partial resection and high dose radiotherapy:
case report and review of the literature. Cureus. 2015;20, 7(9)
20. Wu S, Xu R, Zhao H, Zhu X, Zhang L, Zhao X.Inammatory myobroblastic tumor of renal
pelvis presenting with iterative hematuria and abdominal pain: a case report. Oncol Lett.
2015;10(6):3847–9.
21. Chavez C, Hoffman MA.Complete remission of ALK-negative plasma cell granuloma (inammatory myobroblastic tumor) of the lung induced by celecoxib: a case report and review of
the literature. Oncol Lett. 2013;5(5):1672–6.
22. Tazi K, Ehirchiou A, Karmouni T, Maazaz K, el Khadir K, Koutani A, Ibn Attiya AI, Hachimi
M, Lakrissa A.Inammatory pseudotumors of the kidney: a case report. Ann Urol (Paris).
2001;35:30–3.
379

Part X
Neurology

Chapter 53
Guillain–Barré Syndrome Misdiagnosed
asPosterior Circulation Stroke
JohnMichaelBaratta
Learning Objectives
By the end of this presentation, the clinician will be able to:
1. Demonstrate appropriate understanding of signs and symptoms of the condition
that were presented in this case.
2. Enumerate the various diagnostic techniques to rule out the differential diagnosis of this condition.
3. Discuss the various treatment modalities of this condition.
4. Describe the course of development of this condition by studying this case
presentation.
5. Discuss the symptomatology of this condition.
Introduction
Guillain–Barré syndrome is an acute, demyelinating polyneuropathy which originates through autoimmune mechanisms following an infectious illness [1]. It is
most traditionally associated with sequelae of Campylobacter infection, although
other triggers including a variety of infections and vaccinations have been implicated [2, 3]. Due to damage to the myelin of peripheral nerves, affected patients
often develop bilateral, ascending weakness, sensory impairments, and loss of deep
tendon reexes. While the course can progress insidiously, it is most concerning
J. M. Baratta (*)
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Medical Director of Stroke
Rehabilitation, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
e-mail: john_baratta@med.unc.edu
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
H. Tohid et al. (eds.), The Misdiagnosis Casebook in Clinical Medicine,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28296-6_53
383
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
