Coexistence of a colon carcinoma with two distinct renal cell carcinomas: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>We present the case of a patient with two tumors in his left kidney and a synchronous colon cancer. While coexisting tumors have been previously described in the same kidney or the kidney and other organs, or the colon and other organs, to the best of our knowledge no such concurrency of three primary tumors has been reported in the literature to date.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A 72-year-old man of Greek nationality presenting with pain in the right hypochondrium underwent a series of examinations that revealed gallstones, a tumor in the hepatic flexure of the colon and an additional tumor in the upper pole of the left kidney. He was subjected to a right hemicolectomy, left nephrectomy and cholecystectomy, and his postoperative course was uneventful. Histopathology examinations showed a mucinous colon adenocarcinoma, plus two tumors in the left kidney, a papillary renal cell carcinoma and a chromophobe renal cell carcinoma.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This case underlines the need to routinely scan patients pre-operatively in order to exclude coexisting tumors, especially asymptomatic renal tumors in patients with colorectal cancer, and additionally to screen concurrent tumors genetically in order to detect putative common genetic alterations.</p

Outcomes and Complications of Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery in Pituitary Adenoma

This retrospective study aimed to define outcomes and complications of endoscopic versus microscopic transsphenoidal surgery in pituitary adenoma. Data of 94 patients who underwent transsphenoidal endoscopic (n = 45) or microscopic surgery (n = 49) between June 2000 and June 2014 for pituitary adenoma, performed at Katip Celebi University Hospital, were retrospectively analyzed. The patients' symptomatology, type of adenoma, radiologic findings, surgical outcomes, and preoperative and postoperative complications were investigated. The total subtotal resection rate was 73.4% (69 patients) and partial resection rate was 26.6% (25 patients). Total subtotal resection rate was 77.6% (38 patients) in the microscopic group and 68.9% (31 patients) in the endoscopic group. Total resection was seen more often in the endoscopic group than in the microscopic group, with no significant difference between the groups. Four patients (8.2%) in the microscopic group had postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak compared with 3 patients (6.7%) in the endoscopic group. Two patients (2.1%) had hematoma, with 1 patient each in the endoscopic and microscopic group. Panhypopituitarism development rate was higher in the endoscopic group (no significant difference between the 2 groups). One patient (2%) developed blindness in the microscopic group and 1 (2.2%) had meningitis in the endoscopic group. Based on this study, the total resection rate was higher in the microscopic group than in the endoscopic group. However, outcomes and complication rate did not differ significantly between the 2 surgical techniques. Both techniques have advantages and disadvantages. Prospective randomized controlled trials should be conducted to compare the 2 surgical methods