Tuberculous peritonitis in a German patient with primary biliary cirrhosis: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The number of cases of tuberculosis as a complication in people with immunodeficiency, people on immunosuppressive therapy and among the immigrant population is increasing in Germany. However, tuberculous peritonitis rarely occurs without these risks, particularly in Germans. The incidence of tuberculous peritonitis in Germany is very low; tuberculosis of the intestinal tract was found in approximately 0.8 % of tuberculosis cases in 2004. The diagnosis of tuberculous peritonitis is often delayed on account of non-specific clinical symptoms. The absence of specific biological markers, long incubation times for cultures and non-specific radiographic or ultrasonographic signs increase the morbidity associated with this treatable condition.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We report a case of tuberculous peritonitis in a 73-year-old female German patient. Her medical history revealed primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) since 1992. On admission, she complained of abdominal pain, vomiting, ascites and peripheral edema. The patient has been in a seriously reduced general condition and had fever up to 39.6°C. A few weeks earlier, the patient was in another hospital with the same complaint. Inflammatory parameters were elevated, but the procalcitonin level was normal. Blood culture was always negative, as was the tuberculin test. Ultrasonography of the abdomen showed massive ascites with multiple septa. The patient underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen which showed a thickened intestinal wall in the sigmoid colon and a pronounced enhancement of the peritoneum. Computed tomography scans of the lung showed only slight bilateral pleural effusion. Because of the anaesthetic and bleeding risk due to thrombocytopenia, laparoscopy was not immediately undertaken. The culture from ascites was positive for <it>M</it>.<it>tuberculosis </it>after three weeks.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In primary biliary cirrhosis patients with non-specific clinical symptoms, such as vomiting, abdominal pain, ascites, weight loss, and fever, tuberculous peritonitis must be considered in the initial differential diagnosis, although these symptoms may be attributed to cirrhosis of the liver with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Ultrasonographic and CT scab findings are not specific for tuberculous peritonitis, but an awareness of the ultrasonographic features and the features of the CT scan may help in the diagnosis of tuberculous peritonitis and avoid clinical mismanagement.</p

Development of a duodenal gallstone ileus with gastric outlet obstruction (Bouveret syndrome) four months after successful treatment of symptomatic gallstone disease with cholecystitis and cholangitis: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Cases of gallstone ileus account for 1% to 4% of all instances of mechanical bowel obstruction. The majority of obstructing gallstones are located in the terminal ileum. Less than 10% of impacted gallstones are located in the duodenum. A gastric outlet obstruction secondary to a gallstone ileus is known as Bouveret syndrome. Gallstones usually enter the bowel through a biliary enteral fistula. Little is known about the formation of such fistulae in the course of gallstone disease.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>We report the case of a 72-year-old Caucasian woman born in Germany with a gastric outlet obstruction due to a gallstone ileus (Bouveret syndrome), with a large gallstone impacted in the third part of the duodenum. Diagnostic investigations of our patient included plain abdominal films, gastroscopy and abdominal computed tomography, which showed a biliary enteric fistula between the gallbladder and the duodenal bulb. Our patient was successfully treated by laparotomy, duodenotomy, extraction of the stone, cholecystectomy, and resection of the fistula in a one-stage surgical approach. Histopathological examination showed chronic and acute cholecystitis, with perforated ulceration of the duodenal wall and acute purulent inflammation of the surrounding fatty tissue. Four months prior to developing a gallstone ileus our patient had been hospitalized for cholecystitis, a large gallstone in the gallbladder, cholangitis and a small obstructing gallstone in the common biliary duct. She had been treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy, balloon extraction of the common biliary duct gallstone, and intravenous antibiotics. At the time of her first presentation, abdominal ultrasound and endoscopic examination (including esophagogastroduodenoscopy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) had not shown any evidence of a biliary enteral fistula. In the four months preceding the gallstone ileus our patient had been asymptomatic.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In patients known to have gallstone disease presenting with symptoms of ileus, the differential diagnosis of a gallstone ileus should be considered even in the absence of preceding symptoms related to the gallbladder disease. Gallstones large enough to cause intestinal obstruction usually enter the bowel by a biliary enteral fistula. During the formation of such a fistula, patients can be asymptomatic.</p

Hypercalcemia after transplant nephrectomy in a hemodialysis patient: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Hypercalcemia is a complication often seen in chronic hemodialysis patients. A rare cause of this condition is sarcoidosis. Its highly variable clinical presentation is challenging. Especially in patients suffering chronic kidney graft failure the nonspecific constitutional symptoms of sarcoidosis like fever, weight loss, arthralgia and fatigue may be easily misleading.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A 51 year old male developed hypercalcemia, arthralgia and B-symptoms after explantation of his kidney graft because of suspected acute rejection. The removed kidney showed vasculopathy and tubulointerstitial nephritis, which had not been overt in the biopsy taken half a year earlier. Despite explantation and withdrawal of the immunosuppression the patient's general condition deteriorated progressively. A rapid rise in serum calcium finally provoked us to check for sarcoidosis. CT scans of the lungs, broncho-alveolar-lavage and further lab tests confirmed the diagnosis.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This case demonstrates that withdrawal of immunosuppressive drugs sometimes unmasks sarcoidosis. It should be considered as differential diagnosis even in hemodialysis patients, in whom other reasons for hypercalcemia are much more common.</p

Sensitivity of imaging for multifocal-multicentric breast carcinoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This retrospective study aims to determine: 1) the sensitivity of preoperative mammography (Mx) and ultrasound (US), and re-reviewed Mx to detect multifocal multicentric breast carcinoma (MMBC), defined by pathology on surgical specimens, and 2) to analyze the characteristics of both detected and undetected foci on Mx and US.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Three experienced breast radiologists re-reviewed, independently, digital mammography of 97 women with MMBC pathologically diagnosed on surgical specimens. The radiologists were informed of all neoplastic foci, and blinded to the original mammograms and US reports. With regards to Mx, they considered the breast density, number of foci, the Mx characteristics of the lesions and their BI-RADS classification. For US, they considered size of the lesions, BI-RADS classification and US pattern and lesion characteristics. According to the histological size, the lesions were classified as: index cancer, 2nd lesion, 3rd lesion, and 4th lesion. Any pathologically identified malignant foci not previously described in the original imaging reports, were defined as undetected or missed lesions. Sensitivity was calculated for Mx, US and re-reviewed Mx for detecting the presence of the index cancer as well as additional satellite lesions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Pathological examination revealed 13 multifocal and 84 multicentric cancers with a total of 303 malignant foci (282 invasive and 21 non invasive). Original Mx and US reports had an overall sensitivity of 45.5% and 52.9%, respectively. Mx detected 83/97 index cancers with a sensitivity of 85.6%. The number of lesions <it>un</it>detected by original Mx was 165/303. The Mx pattern of breasts with undetected lesions were: fatty in 3 (1.8%); scattered fibroglandular density in 40 (24.3%), heterogeneously dense in 91 (55.1%) and dense in 31 (18.8%) cases. In breasts with an almost entirely fatty pattern, Mx sensitivity was 100%, while in fibroglandular or dense pattern it was reduced to 45.5%. Re-reviewed Mx detected only 3 additional lesions. The sensitivity of Mx was affected by the presence of dense breast tissue which obscured lesions or by an incorrect interpretation of suspicious findings.</p> <p>US detected 73/80 index cancers (sensitivity of 91.2%), US missed 117 malignant foci with a mean tumor diameter of 6.5 mm; the sensitivity was 52.9%</p> <p>Undetected lesions by US were those smallest in size and present in fatty breast or in the presence of microcalcifications without a visible mass.</p> <p>US sensitivity was affected by the presence of fatty tissue or by the extent of calcification.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Mx missed MMBC malignant foci more often in dense or fibroglandular breasts. US missed small lesions in mainly fatty breasts or when there were only microcalcifications. The combined sensitivity of both techniques to assess MMBC was 58%. We suggest larger studies on multimodality imaging.</p