Search

Summary Giant cell tumor, excluding its prototype in bone, is usually a benign but local aggressive neoplasm originating from tendon sheath or soft tissue. Malignant behavior is uncommon. Visceral organ involvement including urinary bladder is rare. Giant cell tumors in visceral organs usually accompany epithelial tumors and the clinical behavior of giant cell tumor in urinary bladder is similar to its bone counterpart. Here, we report two cases of giant cell tumor located in urinary bladder in comparison with nine reported cases in the English literature. Concurrent noninvasive urothelial carcinoma was also described in all these previous reports and only one patient with follow-up died of disease. One of the two cases we present had no concurrent urothelial tumor at the time of diagnosis but had a history of a low grade noninvasive urothelial carcinoma with three recurrences. The histology of these two cases was similar to the giant cell tumor of bone and composed of oval to spindle mononuclear cells with evenly spaced osteoclast-like giant cells. Immunohistochemically, the giant cells showed staining with osteoclastic markers including CD68, TRAP, and LCA. Immunohistochemical expression of vimentin, CD68, LCA, and smooth muscle actin in mononuclear cells supported a mesenchymal origin with histiocytic lineage. The histologic and immunohistochemical properties in our cases as well as their clinical courses were consistent with a giant cell tumor. Consequently, tumors in urinary bladder showing features of giant cell tumor of bone may also be considered and termed "giant cell tumor".

Abstract Background Appendiceal parasites can cause symptoms of appendiceal pain, independent of microscopic evidence of acute inflammation. The diagnosis of a parasitic infestation is generally achieved only after the pathologic examination of the resected appendices. Patients/Methods Pathology department records were reviewed for all patients who required an operation for symptoms of acute appendicitis between 2000 and 2006. The specimens which were pathologically diagnosed to contain parasites were reevaluated for features of acute inflamation, and parasite type. The medical records were reviewed in detail to achieve a diagnostic score(Eskelinen). Radiologic imaging findings were correlated, if present. Results Of the 190 appendectomies performed, 6 specimens (3,15%) were found to contain parasites(4 Enterobius vermicularis, 2 Taenia subspecies). Appendectomies with Taenia showed acute inflamation, while acute inflamation was absent in the ones with Enterobius vermicularis. The Eskelinen score was higher than the treshold in two cases with an acute inflamation, and in two without. Ultrasound scans, and a computed tomography scan were performed in 5 patients. In 3 of 4 bland appendices, results favored acute appendicitis. Conclusion The diagnosis of gastrointestinal parasites is not only made by examining the stool but the diagnosis can be made by histology from surgical specimens. Timely diagnosis and appropriate therapy might prevent probable future complications that may necessitate surgical procedures, at least in some of the patients. The clinical management of these infections is different from that for classical appendicitis.

Abstract A transrectal needle biopsy from a 63-year-old man was decided because of a high prostatic spesific antigen in the blood, and a hard right lobe in rectal examination. 10 examples were taken from each lobe. In 1 of 4 of the examples from the left lobe, which contained a small focus of adenocarcinoma, numerous eosinophils were observed to surround the carcinomatous focus and attack the carcinoma cells. Uniquely, at the same focus Charcot-Leyden crystals could be seen in the intraluminal space and stromal area. A carcinoma oriented eosinophil accumulation, and Charcot-Leyden crystals in prostate was not described before.

Background: "Atypical cells" parameter in automated urinalysis has recently been introduced. An instrument capable of measuring quantitative and qualitative features of nuclear and cytoplasmic properties of a cell has the potential to detect cellular atypia. Instruments using flow cytometry have been detecting atypical cells in blood for a long time; yet instruments using the same methodology very lately developed this parameter in urinalysis., Materials and Methods: Samples with an atypical cells value higher than 1 atypical cell/µL were included in the study. Besides automated urinalysis, every sample was reflexed to modular unit for digital imaging. The remainder of each sample was stained with Sternheimer dye and examined manually under a light microscope., Results: 50 samples with higher than1 atypical cell/µL result were included in the study. Patients were composed of 43 females (86 %) and 7 males (14 %). The mean age was 47.12 ± 19.45 years. The median atypical cells value was 1.8/µL (95 % range 1.5-2.4/µL). Manual microscopic evaluation of the 50 samples showed atypical cells in 1 sample. The patient had papillary lesions on cystoscopy and pathology report informed a high grade urothelial carcinoma. Other 49 samples were negative for atypical cells in manual microscopy. They were crowded samples with leucocytes and squamous epithelial cells., Conclusions: The positive case provided evidence for Sysmex UN's capability to detect atypical cells in urine. The negative cases presented clues that probable vulvovaginal contamination and crowded specimens could be deceptive for Sysmex UN in this particular parameter.

Background: Desmoplastic small round cell tumor (DSRCT) is a rare, aggressive neoplasm seen in children and young adults, usually manifested by involvement of abdominal serosa. Here, we present an unusual case of primary DSRCT of kidney., Case Presentation: The patient was an 8-year-old girl with a large renal mass which was confused with primitive neuroectodermal tumor (PNET) in the needle biopsy. The tumor had a variegated histology revealing frequent pseudo-rosette formations, pseudopapillary architecture, rhabdoid, clear or pleomorphic cells in addition to typical small round cell morphology and desmoplasia. It showed immunohistochemical features of DSRCT, and EWSR1 re-arrangement., Conclusions: Proffering this diagnosis is particularly difficult for tumors of viscera because of the incognizance of the entity in these locations. Moreover, DSRCT is a great mimicker and may get easily confused with more common kidney malignancies of childhood such as Wilms tumor, PNET/EWS, rhabdoid tumor, clear cell sarcoma, and other small round cell tumors as well as renal cell carcinomas. The distinction is critical as the accurate therapeutic approach will require correct diagnosis.

The authors present two cases of primary sclerosing epithelioid fibrosarcoma (SEF) of the kidney. Both patients had a mass in the upper part of the left kidney without any primary extrarenal neoplastic lesions. Grossly, the tumors were solid masses both measuring 7.5 cm in the greatest diameter. Histologically, one of the lesions exhibited a predominantly lobular growth of round or oval small uniform epithelioid cells in variable cellularity. Circular zones of crowded tumor cells alternating with hypocellular collagenous tissue in a concentric fashion around entrapped native renal tubules were distinctive. The second case was distinctive with significant cytological atypia in the neoplastic cells and prominent reactive proliferations in the trapped renal tubules. Immunohistochemically, vimentin, bcl-2 and MUC4 were diffusely positive in both. They were negative for S-100 protein, CD34, and desmin, whereas CD99 were positive in one lesion. Fluorescence in situ hybridization assay using dual staining probes detected EWSR1-CREB3L1 fusion in each lesion, which is characteristic molecular findings of SEF. One patient presented widespread distant metastases at the time of diagnosis. In the other, no tumor deposits were detected other than primary. Both patients have been alive with 30 and 10 month follow-ups, respectively. These tumors are 6th and 7th cases of primary renal SEF in the literature confirmed by FISH study, which exhibit unique and remarkable histomorphologic features.

Background: Glypican-3 (GPC3) is an oncofetal protein which is encoded by GPC3 gene and takes role in the regulation of cell division and apoptosis. Overexpression of GPC3 has been reported in some types of cancer such as hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma of the lungs and testicular germ cell tumors. The aim of this study was to investigate the immunohistochemical expression of GPC3 in the non-neoplastic urothelium and in urothelial carcinoma (UC). We also aimed to explore the alterations in the GPC3 expression according to the grade and the invasiveness of UC., Methods: GPC3 expression was studied in 108 UC cases by using immunohistochemistry. Each section was evaluated in terms of the extensiveness and intensity of GPC3 staining. Scores of immunostaining were correlated with tumor grade and stage., Results: GPC3 expression was observed in 38 cases (35.2%). GPC3 expression was positive in 43.6% of high and in 13.3% of low grade UC (p: 0.003). In 19 UC cases biopsy also harbored non-neoplastic urothelium which showed no staining for GPC3. The difference in staining percentages between low and high grade UCs, suggests that GPC3 staining could be used as an adjunctive marker in cases where the distinction between the low and high grade tumors is difficult. In addition, lack of staining in the non-neoplastic urothelial areas in 19 cases raises the possibility of the use of GPC3 staining for the distinction between neoplastic and non-neoplastic urothelium, especially in punch biopsy samples., Conclusions: Based on our results potential role of GPC3 in urothelial carcinogenesis warrants further investigation, especially the potential use of GPC3 for therapeutic and diagnostic purposes., Virtual Slides: The virtual slide(s) for this article can be found here: http://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/2260833001522844.

Giant cell tumor, excluding its prototype in bone, is usually a benign but local aggressive neoplasm originating from tendon sheath or soft tissue. Malignant behavior is uncommon. Visceral organ involvement including urinary bladder is rare. Giant cell tumors in visceral organs usually accompany epithelial tumors and the clinical behavior of giant cell tumor in urinary bladder is similar to its bone counterpart. Here, we report two cases of giant cell tumor located in urinary bladder in comparison with nine reported cases in the English literature. Concurrent noninvasive urothelial carcinoma was also described in all these previous reports and only one patient with follow-up died of disease. One of the two cases we present had no concurrent urothelial tumor at the time of diagnosis but had a history of a low grade noninvasive urothelial carcinoma with three recurrences. The histology of these two cases was similar to the giant cell tumor of bone and composed of oval to spindle mononuclear cells with evenly spaced osteoclast-like giant cells. Immunohistochemically, the giant cells showed staining with osteoclastic markers including CD68, TRAP, and LCA. Immunohistochemical expression of vimentin, CD68, LCA, and smooth muscle actin in mononuclear cells supported a mesenchymal origin with histiocytic lineage. The histologic and immunohistochemical properties in our cases as well as their clinical courses were consistent with a giant cell tumor. Consequently, tumors in urinary bladder showing features of giant cell tumor of bone may also be considered and termed "giant cell tumor".