Tumors of the broad ligament: what and when to suspect such rare location.

Although secondary involvement of the broad ligament by malignant tumors arising elsewhere in the abdomen and pelvis is common, primary tumors in this location are rare. Tumors of the broad ligament can be of mesenchymal and mixed nature, such as leiomyoma, the most common neoplasm; epithelial tumors of Müllerian type, imposing a challenge to differentiate them from other adnexal masses; unique tumors from mesonephric origin; and tumor-like lesions. Most neoplasms in this region, whether benign or malignant, usually present clinically with vague symptoms and are often discovered during a routine gynecological examination. Suspicion of such location and knowledge of the potential range of lesions of this region may allow for planning minimally invasive surgical interventions. To be considered tumor from the broad ligament, it should not be connected with either the uterus or the ovary. Thus, the imaging approach to establish the differential diagnosis includes excluding an ovarian, uterine, or tubal origin by recognizing these separately and by rebutting imaging clues pointing to these origins. This pictorial essay reviews some of the imaging findings that may suggest such location and presents some of the possible differential diagnoses by means of illustrative confirmed cases.

Embora o envolvimento secundário do ligamento largo por tumores malignos abdominais e pélvicos seja comum, os tumores primários são raros. Os tumores do ligamento largo podem ser de natureza mesenquimal e mista, como o leiomioma, que é a neoplasia mais comum; tumores epiteliais do tipo mülleriano, constituindo um desafio diferenciá-los de outras massas anexiais; tumores únicos de origem mesonéfrica; e lesões tumor-like. A maioria das neoplasias nessa região, seja benigna ou maligna, geralmente apresenta-se com sintomas clínicos vagos, sendo frequentemente apenas descobertos durante exame ginecológico de rotina. A suspeita de tal localização e o conhecimento do potencial de lesões dessa região podem permitir o planejamento de intervenções cirúrgicas minimamente invasivas. Para ser considerado tumor do ligamento largo, este não deve de forma alguma estar relacionado com o útero, o ovário ou a trompa e, portanto, a abordagem radiológica do diagnóstico diferencial inclui excluir uma origem ovariana, uterina ou tubária, reconhecendo-os separadamente e refutando os sinais radiológicos apontando para essas origens. Este ensaio iconográfico revisa alguns dos achados radiológicos que podem sugerir tal localização e apresenta alguns dos possíveis diagnósticos diferenciais, por meio de casos ilustrativos confirmados.

Congenital systemic venous return anomalies to the right atrium review.

Congenital anomalies of the systemic venous return to the right atrium are rare and stem from variations in the embryogenesis of the venous system. They are usually asymptomatic, and such the major clinical significance of their recognition is to prevent misdiagnosis, in addition to some having technical implications on invasive procedures.Typically, the venous blood from the upper half of the body is carried by the right-sided, superior vena cava (SVC), and some common congenital abnormalities found are persistent left SVC, SVC duplication, anomalous drainage of the brachiocephalic veins, or interruption of the SVC. The venous blood from the lower body is carried by the right-sided, inferior vena cava (IVC), and some common congenital abnormalities found are left-sided IVC, IVC duplication, the absence of IVC (total or just the infrarenal segment), and azygos continuation of the IVC. The azygos system of veins, running up the side of the thoracic vertebral column, connects both systems and can provide an alternative path to the right atrium when either of the venae cavae is absent. Other associated azygos-hemiazygos system anomalies are the azygos lobe and variable configuration of the azygos and hemiazygos veins.Such anomalies are reviewed with particular respect to their embryology and imagiological presentation, as knowledge of the normal anatomy and the most common congenital anomalies of the systemic venous return by a radiologist is important, being incidentally found.

Derivation and external validation of the SHIeLD score for predicting outcome in normotensive pulmonary embolism.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients with normotensive pulmonary embolism (PE) who may benefit from thrombolysis remains challenging. We sought to develop and validate a score to predict 30-days PE-related mortality and/or rescue thrombolysis. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 554 patients with normotensive PE. Independent predictors of the studied endpoint were identified from variables available at admission in the emergency department and were used to create a score. The model was validated in 308 patients from a separate hospital. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients died or needed rescue thrombolysis (44 in the derivation cohort). Four independent prognostic factors were identified: Shock index ≥ 1.0 (OR 3.33; 95% CI 1.40-7.93; P = 0.006), HypoxaemIa by the PaO2/FiO2 ratio (OR 0.92 per 10 units; 95% CI 0.88-0.97; P < 0.001), Lactate (OR 1.38 per mmol/L; 95% CI 1.09-1.75; P = 0.008) and cardiovascular Dysfunction (OR 5.67; 95% CI 2.60-12.33; P < 0.001) - SHIeLD score. In the development cohort, event rates for each risk tercile were 0.0%, 2.2%, and 21.6%. In the validation cohort, corresponding rates were 0.0%, 1.9%, and 14.3%. The C-statistic was 0.90 (95% CI 0.86-0.94, P < 0.001) in the derivation cohort and 0.82 (95% CI 0.75-0.89, P < 0.001) in the validation cohort. Decision curve analysis showed that the SHIeLD score is able to accurately identify more true positive cases than the European Society of Cardiology decision criteria. CONCLUSIONS: A risk score to predict 30-days PE-related mortality and/or rescue thrombolysis in patients with normotensive PE was developed and validated. This score may assist physicians in selecting patients for closer monitoring or aggressive treatment strategy.

Tumors of the broad ligament: what and when to suspect such rare location / Tumores do ligamento largo: o que e quando suspeitar tão rara localização

Abstract Although secondary involvement of the broad ligament by malignant tumors arising elsewhere in the abdomen and pelvis is common, primary tumors in this location are rare. Tumors of the broad ligament can be of mesenchymal and mixed nature, such as leiomyoma, the most common neoplasm; epithelial tumors of Müllerian type, imposing a challenge to differentiate them from other adnexal masses; unique tumors from mesonephric origin; and tumor-like lesions. Most neoplasms in this region, whether benign or malignant, usually present clinically with vague symptoms and are often discovered during a routine gynecological examination. Suspicion of such location and knowledge of the potential range of lesions of this region may allow for planning minimally invasive surgical interventions. To be considered tumor from the broad ligament, it should not be connected with either the uterus or the ovary. Thus, the imaging approach to establish the differential diagnosis includes excluding an ovarian, uterine, or tubal origin by recognizing these separately and by rebutting imaging clues pointing to these origins. This pictorial essay reviews some of the imaging findings that may suggest such location and presents some of the possible differential diagnoses by means of illustrative confirmed cases.

Resumo Embora o envolvimento secundário do ligamento largo por tumores malignos abdominais e pélvicos seja comum, os tumores primários são raros. Os tumores do ligamento largo podem ser de natureza mesenquimal e mista, como o leiomioma, que é a neoplasia mais comum; tumores epiteliais do tipo mülleriano, constituindo um desafio diferenciá-los de outras massas anexiais; tumores únicos de origem mesonéfrica; e lesões tumor-like. A maioria das neoplasias nessa região, seja benigna ou maligna, geralmente apresenta-se com sintomas clínicos vagos, sendo frequentemente apenas descobertos durante exame ginecológico de rotina. A suspeita de tal localização e o conhecimento do potencial de lesões dessa região podem permitir o planejamento de intervenções cirúrgicas minimamente invasivas. Para ser considerado tumor do ligamento largo, este não deve de forma alguma estar relacionado com o útero, o ovário ou a trompa e, portanto, a abordagem radiológica do diagnóstico diferencial inclui excluir uma origem ovariana, uterina ou tubária, reconhecendo-os separadamente e refutando os sinais radiológicos apontando para essas origens. Este ensaio iconográfico revisa alguns dos achados radiológicos que podem sugerir tal localização e apresenta alguns dos possíveis diagnósticos diferenciais, por meio de casos ilustrativos confirmados.