Nasolacrimal Sac Diverticulum: A Case Series and Literature Review.

PURPOSE: To describe the demographics, presentation, treatment, and outcome in 10 cases of lacrimal sac diverticulum and to review the literature on this topic, and to determine the incidence of diverticula from a series of dacryocystograms. METHODS: Data were collected for all consecutive patients with lacrimal sac diverticulum seen between 2003 and 2015, including patient demographics, clinical presentation, imaging findings, treatment, and follow-up. A systematic literature review was performed for cases of lacrimal sac diverticulum. A retrospective review of 400 consecutive dacryocystograms was performed to determine the incidence of lacrimal sac diverticulum. RESULTS: Ten cases (9 patients) of lacrimal sac diverticulum are described, and a further 36 cases were discovered through a literature review. Epiphora, swelling, and dacryocystitis and/or diverticulitis were the most common presenting complaints. When all 46 cases are combined, lacrimal patency was demonstrated in 50% of cases. Dacryocystography diagnosed only 57% of patients with diverticulum, not helped by the addition of ultrasound or CT. The incidence of diverticulum was 3.2% on review of 400 consecutive dacryocystograms (1.6% per lacrimal system). Surgical management with dacryocystorhinostomy and/or diverticulum excision was effective in all 34 operated cases at resolving symptoms in the case series and literature review. CONCLUSIONS: Lacrimal sac diverticula present with epiphora, medial canthal swelling, dacryocystitis, and/or diverticulitis. Dacryocystography, despite being the most sensitive radiologic test, is only 59% sensitive, and adjunctive CT and ultrasound have limited use. Surgical management is recommended because conservative management often fails. Dacryocystorhinostomy, diverticulum excision, or a combination thereof appears to be equivalent in achieving resolution of symptoms.

Implications of the diagnostic criteria of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis in clinical practice: Analysis from the Australian Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Registry.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines for the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) provide specific criteria for diagnosis in the setting of multidisciplinary discussion (MDD). We evaluate the utility and reproducibility of these diagnostic guidelines, using clinical data from the Australian IPF Registry. METHODS: All patients enrolled in the registry undergo a diagnostic review whereby international IPF guidelines are applied via a registry MDD. We investigated the clinical applicability of these guidelines with regard to: (i) adherence to guidelines, (ii) Natural history of IPF diagnostic categories and (iii) Concordance for diagnostic features. RESULTS: A total of 417 participants (69% male, 70.6 ± 8.0 years) with a clinical diagnosis of IPF underwent MDD. The 23% of participants who did not meet IPF diagnostic criteria displayed identical disease behaviour to those with confirmed IPF. Honeycombing on radiology was associated with a worse prognosis and this translated into poorer prognosis in the 'definite' IPF group. While there was moderate agreement for IPF diagnostic categories, agreement for specific radiological features, other than honeycombing, was poor. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, physicians do not always follow IPF diagnostic guidelines. We demonstrate a cohort of IPF patients who do not meet IPF diagnostic guideline criteria, based largely on their radiology and lack of lung biopsy, but who have outcomes identical to those with IPF.

Examining the sensitivity of ultrasound-guided large core biopsy for invasive breast carcinoma in a population screening programme.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the sensitivity of ultrasound-guided core-needle biopsy (UCB) in invasive breast carcinoma and to establish causes of false-negative biopsy in a population screening programme. METHOD: We identified 571 consecutive women diagnosed with surgically proven invasive breast cancer. Histology from 14-gauge UCB was compared with surgical histology to identify true-positive and false-negative ultrasound core biopsies. True-positive and false-negative groups were compared for tumour size and histology. On blinded review of UCB images and pathology reports from false negative (n = 20) and a random sample of true-positive cases (n = 80), we compared core sample number and needle visualisation in the lesion. RESULTS: Of 571 carcinomas sampled with UCB, 551 (96.5%) were true positive and 20 (3.5%) were false negative. The mean core number was 2.0 (range 1-3) for false negatives and 2.25 (range 1-4) for true positives (P = 0.27). Mean tumour sizes were 13.3 and 16.2 mm for the false-negative and true-positive groups, respectively (P = 0.25). Tubular carcinomas represented 30% (6/20) of false-negative cases compared with 5.1% (28/551) of the true-positive cases (P < 0.001). On blinded review, needle visualisation within the lesion was demonstrated in 47.4% (9/19) of false-negative cases and 76.3% (61/80) of true-positive cases (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated a sensitivity of 96.5% with a mean of 2.21 cores. False-negative results were more likely in the absence of post-fire needle position verification and with tubular carcinomas. Neither tumour size nor core number predicted diagnostic accuracy.