scholarly journals S2960 Incidental Diagnosis of a Rare Metastatic Neuroendocrine Breast Cancer During Routine Screening Mammogram Which Eventually Revealed Primary Small Intestine Carcinoid Tumor

2021 ◽  
Vol 116 (1) ◽  
pp. S1225-S1225
Author(s):  
Ali Rahman ◽  
Sura Alqaisi ◽  
Martin Barnes ◽  
William Lipera
2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cevahir Özer ◽  
Seda Zenger

A rare syndrome, Chilaiditi’s syndrome is interposition of the colon only or with the small intestine in hepatodiaphragmatic area. It may be asymptomatic, but it may also present with symptoms, such as abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, constipation and respiratory distress. We present a patient who was admitted with urological problems; he was incidentally diagnosed with Chilaiditi’s syndrome


2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 341-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kasey Clavelle ◽  
Dana King ◽  
Angela R. Bazzi ◽  
Valerie Fein-Zachary ◽  
Jennifer Potter

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Marya ◽  
Veronica Baptista ◽  
Anupam Singh ◽  
Joseph Charpentier ◽  
David Cave

Until 2001, the nonsurgical evaluation of the small intestine was largely limited to the use of radiologic imaging (e.g., small bowel follow-through or enteroclysis). With the now widespread availability of video capsule endoscopy and deep enteroscopy since 2001, we are now able to visualize the length and most of the mucosa of the small intestine and manage small bowel lesions that were previously inaccessible except by surgical intervention. This review serves as an overview for these two procedures, detailing the indications and contraindications, proper timing of the procedure, technical aspects of the devices themselves, possible complications, and outcomes. Figures show endoscopic images that demonstrate multiple angioectasias, bleeding during capsule endoscopy, active Crohn disease of the small bowel, severe mucosal scalloping, small bowel carcinoid tumor, small bowel polyp associated with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug enteropathy; serial x-rays of a patient with a patency capsule retained inside the small intestine; a computer image showing the distribution of small bowel tumors; and a pie chart displaying the breakdown of the distribution of benign and malignant tumors that can be found in the small intestine. Videos show multiple angioectasias, bleeding during capsule endoscopy, active Crohn disease of the small bowel, small bowel carcinoid tumor, and small bowel polyp associated with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. This review contains 10 highly rendered figures, 5 videos, and 50 references.


2017 ◽  
Vol 83 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-62
Author(s):  
Julia L. Brothers ◽  
Mark A. Mikhitarian ◽  
Lee S. Fleischer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 1774-1780 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mara A. Schonberg ◽  
Rebecca A. Silliman ◽  
Edward R. Marcantonio

Purpose To examine outcomes of mammography screening among women ≥ 80 years to inform decision making. Patients and Methods We conducted a cohort study of 2,011 women without a history of breast cancer who were age ≥ 80 years between 1994 and 2004 and who received care at one academic primary care clinic or two community health centers in Boston, MA. Medical record data were abstracted on all screening and diagnostic mammograms, breast ultrasounds and biopsies performed, all breast cancers diagnosed through December 31, 2006, and on sociodemographics. Date and cause of death were confirmed using the National Death Index. Results The majority of patients (78.6%) were non-Hispanic white and 51.4% (n = 1,034) had been screened with mammography since age 80 years. Among women who were screened, eight were diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ, 16 with early stage disease (1.5%), two with late stage disease, and one died as a result of breast cancer. Many (110; 11%) experienced a false-positive screening mammogram that led to 19 benign breast biopsies, eight refused work-up, and three experienced a false-negative screening mammogram; 97 were screened within 2 years of their death from other causes. There were no significant differences in the rate, stage, recurrence rate, or deaths due to breast cancer between women who were screened and those who were not screened. Conclusion The majority of women ≥ 80 years are screened with mammography yet few benefit. Meanwhile, 12.5% experience a burden from screening. The data from this study can be used to inform elderly women's decision making and potentially lead to more rational use of screening.


Urology ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 533-537 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald M. Benoit ◽  
Michael J. Naslund ◽  
Paul H. Lange

2015 ◽  
Vol 154 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphael J. Louie ◽  
Jennifer E. Tonneson ◽  
Minda Gowarty ◽  
Philip P. Goodney ◽  
Richard J. Barth ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Smith-Bindman ◽  
Rachel Ballard-Barbash ◽  
Diana L Miglioretti ◽  
Julietta Patnick ◽  
Karla Kerlikowske

To compare the performance of screening mammography in the USA and the UK, a consecutive sample of screening mammograms was obtained in women aged 50 and older from 1996 to 1999 who participated in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium in the USA ( n=978,591) and the National Health Service Breast Cancer Screening Program in the UK ( n=3.94 million), including 6943 diagnosed with breast cancer within 12 months of screening. Recall rates were defined as the percentage of screening mammograms with a recommendation for further evaluation including diagnostic mammography, ultrasound, clinical examination or biopsy, and cancer detection rates including invasive cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed within 12 months of a screening mammogram. All results were stratified by whether examinations were first or subsequent and adjusted to a standard age distribution. Among women who underwent a first screening mammogram, 13.3% of women in the USA versus 7.2% of women in the UK were recalled for further evaluation (relative risk for recall 1.9; 95% CI 1.8–1.9). For subsequent examinations recall rates were approximately 50% lower, but remained twice as high in the USA as in the UK. A similar percentage of women underwent biopsy in each setting, but rates of percutaneous biopsy were lower and rates of open surgical biopsy were higher in the USA. Women undergo screening approximately every 18 months in the USA and every 36 months in the UK. Based on a 20-year period of screening, the estimated percentage of women who would be recalled for additional testing was nearly threefold higher in the USA. The number of cancers detected was also higher in the USA (55 versus 43), and most of the increase was in the detection of small invasive and in situ cancers. The numbers of large cancers detected (>2 cm) were very similar between the two countries. Recall rates are approximately two to three times higher in the USA than in the UK. Importantly, despite less frequent screening in the USA, there are no substantial differences in the rates of detection of large cancers. Efforts to improve mammographic screening in the USA should target lowering the recall rate without reducing the cancer detection rate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document