Sunday, March 23, 2008

Fleshy Lesions on a 32-Year-Old Woman


Background


A 32-year-old woman presents to the emergency department (ED) with several flesh-colored papules on her face, trunk, and upper extremities.

She first noticed the lesions at approximately 10 years of age; however, over the past 5 years, the lesions have increased in number and become uncomfortable. She primarily complains of irritation from the lesions along her bra line. She underwent excision of similar skin lesions 5 years ago, but they have since recurred. She denies having any discharge, pain, trauma, contact with individuals with atypical skin lesions or rashes, travel out of the country, unusual exposure to animals, or a history of sexually transmitted diseases.

The patient's medical and surgical history includes environmental allergies, frequent episodes of bronchitis, and the aforementioned excisions. She has no known drug allergies, and she takes cetirizine HCl and fluticasone propionate for seasonal allergies. Her family history is significant for coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and glaucoma, but there is no family history of similar lesions. She does not smoke and only drinks alcohol on occasion. The review of her systems is otherwise unremarkable.

The physical examination reveals dozens of 0.5-2.0 cm fleshy nodules spread over her trunk, face, and upper extremities. The nodules are nontender to palpation and nonerythematous, and they produce no discharge, crusting, or scaling. Several tan oval macules measuring 1.5-3 cm in size and patches with well-defined borders are located on her trunk and upper extremities (see Images). Her vital signs are within normal limits, and her other physical findings are unremarkable.

Discussion
Neurofibromatosis (NF) is an autosomal dominant disorder with numerous presentations that can affect nearly every organ system. The 2 major subtypes of NF are peripheral NF, also known as NF type 1 (NF1), and central NF, which is referred to as NF type 2 (NF2). These terms are not completely accurate, however, because NF1 also can include central nervous system (CNS) abnormalities.

About 50% of cases of NF are familial; the other 50% are caused by spontaneous gene mutation. NF1, also known as von Recklinghausen disease, is a common genetic disorder involving a mutation in the gene that produces neurofibromin on chromosome 17; the condition affects 1 in every 3000-4000 births.[1] All races are affected, and the 2 sexes are affected equally.[3] Two or more of the following 7 criteria must be present in order to make the diagnosis of NF1: 6 or more café-au-lait spots (irregularly shaped, evenly pigmented, brown macules), 2 or more neurofibromas, axillary or inguinal freckling, Lisch nodules (hamartomas of the iris), optic gliomas, various types of osseous lesions, and a first-degree relative with the condition.

Symptomatic NF1 typically initially manifests as café-au-lait spots that may be present at birth or that appear over time during childhood. Axillary or inguinal freckles are not usually present at birth but, rather, appear throughout childhood and adolescence. Neurofibromas are rarely seen in young children but usually appear over time in older children, adolescents, and adults. The patient may have as few as 3 or as many as thousands of these benign lesions, which consist of Schwann cells, neural fibroblasts, mast cells, and vascular elements. The neurofibromas may occur anywhere in the body and can potentially lead to marked disfigurement. If the lesions are deep, they may only be detected through palpation; cutaneous lesions may initially appear as small papules on the trunk, the extremities, the scalp, or the face. A specific type of these lesions is a plexiform neurofibroma, which is a more diffuse type of growth that can be locally invasive and quite deep. These lesions may be associated with bony erosion and pain, and they may also be accompanied by overlying hyperpigmentation or hypertrichosis. The onset of puberty or pregnancy may be associated with an increased number of neurofibromas, as well as an increase in the speed of preexisting lesion growth. Lesions along visual, auditory, or CNS nerve pathways may result in blindness, deafness, or neurologic deficits. On histology, the neurofibromas are generally well-differentiated tumors that contain elongated spindle-shaped cells and pleomorphic fibroblast-like cells. Some lesions may contain inflammatory cells. Occasionally, a large neurofibroma, a deep plexiform neurofibroma, or a peripheral nerve sheath tumor residing within the brachial or pelvic plexus may undergo malignant transformation into a neurofibrosarcoma. Unlike benign neurofibromas, neurofibrosarcomas are characteristically hypercellular, with giant cells, increased numbers of mitoses, and vascular proliferation. Additionally, small masses of malignant cells may be present within larger masses of benign cells (eg, as in a plexiform neurofibroma).

Optic nerve tumors occur primarily in children younger than 5 years. The most common presenting symptom is asymmetric, noncorrectable visual loss, but subtle peripheral field defects, optic nerve pallor, color-discrimination difficulties, or proptosis may be present without visual acuity being affected. A slow-growing optic nerve glioma (ONG) may lead to vision problems in some older children and adolescents; these patients should be monitored for visual difficulties throughout childhood and adulthood. In adults, a visually insignificant ONG may be detected incidentally on head imaging studies. Although Lisch nodules are usually not visible without use of a slit lamp, they may occasionally be seen with a direct or indirect ophthalmoscope, especially in individuals with light-colored irises. Choroidal abnormalities with a patchy appearance or retinal corkscrew vascular changes may also be noted on funduscopic examination.

Orthopedic manifestations are also commonly encountered. Congenital pseudarthrosis may be evident at birth; bowing of the tibia is the most typical presentation. Thinning and angulation of the long bones can occur throughout early childhood and adolescence, with prominence of the anterior tibia and progressive deformity; less commonly, bowing of the forearm can occur. Scoliosis with or without kyphosis may become evident in childhood or adolescence; when this finding is present in children younger than 10 years, scoliosis is associated with a poor prognosis and is likely to progress rapidly. Scoliosis detected during adolescence should still be monitored clinically, but it is much less likely to require orthopedic intervention. Sphenoid bone dysplasia is usually asymptomatic, but it can occasionally be associated with herniation through the bony defect. Other skeletal anomalies, such as fibrous dysplasia, subperiosteal bone cysts, or vertebral scalloping, can also be found.

Rare complications of NF1 include renal arterial stenosis and pheochromocytoma, either of which can present with hypertension.

NF2 is a progressive genetic disorder that is present in 1 in every 33,000-40,000 births.Patients with NF2 (which results from an abnormality on chromosome 22) typically present with acoustic neuromas or vestibular schwannomas. The clinical manifestations of NF2 include tinnitus, balance disorders, and progressive hearing loss. Affected patients may also have meningiomas, juvenile cataracts, or schwannomas of the dorsal roots of the spinal cord. The diagnosis of NF2 is based on the presence of bilateral acoustic neuromas or a unilateral acoustic neuroma in a first-degree relative with NF2.

For both NF1 and NF2, the diagnosis is primarily based on the physical findings and a positive family history. Plain radiologic studies, which may detect many bony abnormalities (such as modeling defects of the long bones or ribs, bony erosion secondary to an adjacent plexiform neurofibroma, or scoliosis), may be useful diagnostic tests. Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain is the preferred diagnostic imaging study of the head, and it can be ordered either routinely—as a standard screening—or it can be ordered for patients with specific indications, such as the onset of neurologic problems or headaches. MRI studies have been shown to frequently detect unidentified bright objects in the brain parenchyma; generally, these bright spots do not enhance, they cause no mass effect, and they often resolve as the patient gets older. It has been theorized that these masses may represent benign hamartomas. MRI scanning of the brain can assist in evaluating the optic nerves or optic chiasm. This imaging modality is also useful for diagnosing and evaluating other internal lesions, such as mediastinal masses, spinal cord tumors, deep plexiform neurofibromas, neurofibromas of the brachial or sacral plexus, and abdominopelvic lesions. Genetic analyses and psychological or developmental assessments should also be part of the evaluation of patients with neurofibromas.

No cure exists for NF1 or NF2. The recommendations for follow-up include referral to support groups, psychological counseling, and evaluation for learning disorders; potential surgical excision of the lesions; and regular monitoring by a primary care provider for any lesion changes (patients with NF1 are at a somewhat increased risk for malignancy). Annual ocular examinations are recommended. Genetic testing is also available for patients with NF who wish to have children. Historically, surgery has been a successful treatment for the lesions themselves; however, there is often recurrence, and nerve damage is a risk in cases in which the lesions are located along neural pathways.

(Source: Medscape)

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Guidelines Issued for Early Detection of Colorectal Cancer

News Author: Laurie Barclay, MDCME
Author: Penny Murata, MD

March 10, 2008 — The American Cancer Society has issued guidelines for the screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and adenomatous polyps in asymptomatic, average-risk adults. The new consensus guidelines, which were jointly developed with the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American College of Radiology, beginning in 2006 to 2007, are published in the March 5 First Look issue of CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians and will appear in the May-June 2008 print issue.

"In the United States, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer diagnosed among men and women and the second leading cause of death from cancer," write Bernard Levin, MD, from The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, and colleagues from the American Cancer Society Colorectal Cancer Advisory Group, the US Multi-Society Task Force, and the American College of Radiology Colon Cancer Committee. "CRC largely can be prevented by the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps, and survival is significantly better when CRC is diagnosed while still localized."

This update of each contributing organization's guidelines groups screening tests into those that primarily detect cancer early and also can detect adenomatous polyps, thus offering a greater potential for prevention through polypectomy.

Clinicians should make patients aware of the full range of screening options whenever feasible. At a minimum, however, clinicians should be prepared to offer patients a choice between a screening test that is effective at both early cancer detection and cancer prevention through the detection and removal of polyps and a screening test for which benefits are primarily limited to early detection of cancer. The 3 sponsoring organizations strongly concur that the main goal of screening should be the prevention of CRC.

"In the last decade, there has been an increase in the number of technologies available for CRC screening, and in the case of stool tests, there has been growth in the number of commercial versions of guaiac-based and immunochemical-based stool tests (gFOBT [guaiac-based fecal occult blood test] and FIT [fecal immunochemical test])," the authors of the guidelines write. "It is our hope that these new recommendations will facilitate increased rates of CRC screening and that referring clinicians find these new guidelines ease some of the challenges they have experienced in promoting CRC screening to their patients."

In the first phase of the guidelines update process, stool tests were reviewed, including the gFOBT, the FIT, and the stool DNA test (sDNA). In the second phase, the panel developed recommendations for the structural examinations, including flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSIG), colonoscopy, double-contrast barium enema (DCBE), and computed tomographic (or virtual) colonography (CTC).

The panel discussed these issues, heard presentations from outside experts, relied on previous evidence-based reviews, and searched MEDLINE (National Library of Medicine) and bibliographies of identified articles for literature related to CRC screening and specific to individual tests published between January 2002 and March 2007. When evidence was insufficient to provide a clear, evidence-based conclusion, final recommendations were based on expert opinion.

Testing options for the detection of adenomatous polyps and cancer for asymptomatic adults 50 years and older include FSIG every 5 years, colonoscopy every 10 years, DCBE every 5 years, or CTC every 5 years.

Testing options that primarily detect cancer in asymptomatic adults 50 years and older include annual gFOBT with high-test sensitivity for cancer; annual FIT with high-test sensitivity for cancer; or sDNA with high-test sensitivity for cancer, although the optimal interval for sDNA is uncertain.

Each screening test has unique advantages, has been shown to be cost-effective, and has associated risks and limitations. Ultimately, patient preferences and availability of testing resources guide the selection of screening tests.

The disadvantages of the structural tests are that they require bowel preparation, but their primary advantage is that they can detect polyps as well as cancer. Conscious sedation is used for colonoscopy. FSIG is uncomfortable, and screening benefit is limited to the portion of the colon that is directly examined.

Risks for colonoscopy, DCBE, and CTC may rarely include perforation; colonoscopy may also be associated with bleeding. Positive findings on FSIG, DCBE, and CTC usually result in referral for colonoscopy.

The advantages of the stool tests are that they are noninvasive, they do not require a bowel preparation, they can be done in the privacy of the patient's home, and they are more readily available to patients without adequate insurance coverage or local resources.
However, these noninvasive tests are less likely to prevent cancer vs the invasive tests; they must be repeated at regular intervals to be effective; and, if the test is abnormal, an invasive test, namely colonoscopy, will be required. For patients who are unwilling to have repeated testing or to undergo colonoscopy if the test results are abnormal, stool testing is ineffective and should not be recommended.

This update of the CRC screening guidelines focused on screening in average-risk adults and did not consider evidence concerning CRC screening or surveillance for individuals at increased and high risk. Patients with a personal history of adenomatous polyps or curative-intent resection of CRC, a family history of either CRC or colorectal adenomas diagnosed in a first-degree relative before age 60 years, or a history of inflammatory bowel disease of significant duration or 1 of 2 hereditary syndromes should continue to follow recommendations issued previously by the American Cancer Society or the US Multi-Society Task Force for individuals at increased risk.
"There is compelling evidence to support screening average-risk individuals over age 50 years to detect and prevent CRC," the panel concludes. "Screening of average-risk individuals can reduce CRC mortality by detecting cancer at an early, curable stage and by detecting and removing clinically significant adenomas. . . . No CRC screening test is perfect, either for cancer detection or adenoma detection."

Some of the authors of the guidelines have disclosed various financial relationships with Exact Sciences, Vital Images, Medicsight, Covidien, Viatronix, Fleet, Olympus, Given Imaging, Avantis, NeoGuide, G.I. View, American BioOptics. Genzyme, Epigenomics, GeneNews, and licensure of a CT colonography software patent to GE Medical Systems.

CA Cancer J Clin. Published online March 5, 2008.

Clinical Context
CRC is the third most common cancer in men and women in the United States and is the second leading cause of deaths from cancer, as reported by Jemal and colleagues in the March-April 2008 issue of CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. Tools for CRC screening include stool tests for occult blood or exfoliated DNA to detect cancer and structural examinations to detect adenocarcinoma and identify adenomatous polyps. Stool tests include the gFOBT, the FIT, and the sDNA. Structural examinations include FSIG, colonoscopy, DCBE, and CTC.

The American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology have collaborated on guidelines for the detection of adenomatous polyps and CRC in asymptomatic, average-risk adults 50 years or older.

Pearls for Practice
Stool test screening options to detect CRC in asymptomatic, average-risk adults 50 years and older include the annual high-sensitivity gFOBT, the annual FIT, or the sDNA test at uncertain intervals.

Structural examination screening options to detect CRC and adenomatous polyps in asymptomatic, average-risk adults 50 years and older include FSIG every 5 years, colonoscopy every 10 years, DBCE every 5 years, or CTC every 5 years.

(Source: Medscape)

Thursday, February 07, 2008

NT-ProBNP Level Best Prognostic Indicator for Advanced Heart Failure

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Jan 29 - New research indicates that the plasma level of NT-proBNP is a better prognostic indictor than the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimated with standard equations in patients with advanced heart failure.

As reported in the European Heart Journal for December, Dr. Roy S. Gardner, from the Royal Infirmary in Glasgow, UK, and colleagues assessed NT-proBNP levels and GFR (estimated with the modification of diet in renal disease equations) in 182 patients with advanced heart failure who were being considered for cardiac transplantation. The median follow-up period was 642 days.

During follow-up, 40 patients died, 4 required urgent cardiac transplantation, and another 29 underwent non-urgent transplantation.

On univariate analysis, GFR predicted all-cause mortality. On multivariate analysis, however, only the NT-proBNP level was a significant independent predictor of all-cause mortality or the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality or urgent transplantation.

The current study "represents an important step forward regarding the utility of NT-proBNP testing in patients with impaired renal function," Dr. James L. Januzzi, from Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and colleagues write in a related editorial.

The findings indicate that NT-proBNP "is strongly prognostic for death and/or urgent cardiac transplantation even in the presence of renal impairment," they add.

Eur Heart J 2008;28:2960-2961,3027-3033.

Source: Medscape

I Love Garfield!






















Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Random Case of the Day - 56 year old female with an incidental cardiac mass identified on chest X-ray.

DIAGNOSIS: Cardiac myxoma

This lesion features myxoid stroma and bland stromal cells which cluster around blood vessels. There’s a background of chronic inflammation, and hemosiderin deposition onto elastic fibers. Also on the slide there are areas of superimposed organizing thrombus. These findings are diagnostic of a cardiac myxoma.

An organizing thrombus would lack the extensive myxoid areas with characteristic perivascular spindle cells of cardiac myxoma. Mucinous carcinoma and myxofibrosarcoma would show greater degrees of cytologic atypia, and can also be excluded by clinical history.

Cardiac myxomas are part of the Carney Complex, which includes cutaneous pigmentation around the lips, cardiac myxoma, cutaneous angiomyxoma, myxoid fibroadenoma, pigmented nodular adrenal cortical disease, large cell calcifying Sertoli cell tumor of the testis, pituitary adenoma, blue nevi and, psammomatous melanotic schwannoma.

Source: Johns Hopkins Surgical Pathology Conference

Screening Pregnant Women for Bacterial Vaginosis Not Recommended

News Author:
Laurie Barclay, MDCME

Author: Laurie Barclay, MD

February 4, 2008 — The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends against clinicians screening for bacterial vaginosis in asymptomatic pregnant women who are at low risk for premature delivery, according to the results of an updated review and guidelines reported in the February 5 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine.

"The associations between bacterial vaginosis and adverse pregnancy outcomes, such as preterm delivery, are well documented," the USPSTF writes. "Good-quality evidence indicates that screening tests (the Amsel clinical criteria or Gram stain) can detect bacterial vaginosis."
The USPSTF review suggests that there is good evidence that screening for bacterial vaginosis does not benefit pregnant women at low risk for premature delivery, and the expert USPSTF panel therefore recommends against screening low-risk women for bacterial vaginosis.
Among women of reproductive age, bacterial vaginosis is the most common lower genital tract syndrome, and it has been associated with premature births or low birthweight. Because it is easy to screen for and treat bacterial vaginosis, some experts have recommended screening all pregnant women for this condition. However, in this review, the USPSTF finds insufficient evidence to recommend either for or against screening for the syndrome in pregnant women at high risk for premature delivery.

The USPSTF identified new evidence that addressed gaps identified in the previous 2001 USPSTF recommendation, and they weighed the benefits and harms of screening for bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy in light of the new evidence. A search of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library databases, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects identified published literature on this topic, and the panel also systematically reviewed reference lists and consulted with experts in this field.

When appropriate based on the available data, a series of meta-analyses, using both newly identified data and those contained in the 2001 report, allowed estimation of the pooled effect of treatment of bacterial vaginosis on preterm delivery (before 37, 34, or 32 weeks) and on low birthweight and preterm, premature rupture of membranes.

Based on this review and meta-analyses, the USPSTF panel concluded that current evidence is insufficient to evaluate the balance of benefits and harms of screening for bacterial vaginosis in pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery (I statement).

The USPSTF panel issued the recommendation not to screen for bacterial vaginosis in pregnant women at low risk for preterm delivery (D level recommendation).

In asymptomatic pregnant women at low risk for preterm delivery, studies are lacking, and evidence is therefore poor, for harms of screening for bacterial vaginosis. However, evidence is fair that false-positive results from screening lead to harms caused by treatment.
In asymptomatic pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery, studies are lacking, and evidence is therefore poor, for harms of screening for bacterial vaginosis. Studies on the harms of treatment have yielded conflicting results in this population.

The overall USPSTF assessment and conclusion is that for asymptomatic pregnant women at low risk for preterm delivery, there is moderate certainty that screening for bacterial vaginosis has no net benefit. For asymptomatic pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery, the evidence is conflicting, preventing determination of the balance of benefits and harms.
"Available evidence on treatment benefit is conflicting," the USPSTF writes. "Additional research is needed to evaluate the benefit of screening and treating asymptomatic bacterial vaginosis in women at highest risk for preterm delivery."

Risk factors for preterm delivery include African American race, pelvic infection, and previous preterm delivery.

Gram stain or the Amsel clinical criteria can be used to diagnose bacterial vaginosis. Clinical diagnosis by the Amsel criteria requires that 3 or 4 of the following criteria be present: (1) vaginal pH of more than 4.7, (2) presence of clue cells on wet mount, (3) thin homogeneous discharge, and (4) amine "fishy odor" when potassium hydroxide is added to the discharge.
Although the optimal treatment regimen for bacterial vaginosis is unclear, oral or vaginal gel metronidazole and oral or vaginal cream clindamycin are typically used.

"Bacterial vaginosis is more common among African-American women, women of low socioeconomic status, and women who have previously delivered low-birthweight infants," the USPSTF concludes. "Research is also needed to assess which screening tests providers use to diagnose bacterial vaginosis in clinical practice and the accuracy of these tests. Finally, continued research is needed to determine the optimal treatment regimen for bacterial vaginosis."
The Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland, supported this study.
Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:214-219, 220-233.

Clinical Context
In women of childbearing age, bacterial vaginosis is the most frequently documented lower genital tract syndrome. There are well-documented associations between bacterial vaginosis and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including premature birth or low birthweight. Good-quality evidence indicates that screening tests can detect bacterial vaginosis.

Because it is easy to screen for and treat bacterial vaginosis, some experts have recommended screening all pregnant women for this condition. However, in this review, the USPSTF finds insufficient evidence to recommend either for or against screening for the syndrome in pregnant women at high risk for premature delivery.

Pearls for Practice
The USPSTF review suggests that there is good evidence that screening for bacterial vaginosis does not benefit pregnant women at low risk for premature delivery, and the expert USPSTF panel therefore recommends against screening low-risk women for bacterial vaginosis (D level recommendation).

Based on this review and meta-analyses, the USPSTF panel concluded that current evidence is insufficient to evaluate the balance of benefits and harms of screening for bacterial vaginosis in pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery (I statement).

Source: Medscape