Tag: thorax

Cáceres Corner Case 236 – Vignette

~ Dr. Pepe ~ Leave a comment

Dear Friends,

Today’s radiographs belong to a 65-year-old woman with back pain. She was operated for myxoid liposarcoma of the lower limb seven years ago.

Do you see any abnormality?
If so, where is it?

1. Upper area
2. Middle area
3. Lower area
4. I don’t see it

Click here to see the answer

Findings: PA radiograph shows a double contour of the aortic knob (A, arrow) which indicates a superimposed mediastinal mass either in front or behind the knob. Lateral view shows increased opacity of the upper thoracic spine (B, circle), suggesting a posterior mass.

Click here to see more images

Unenhanced CT was done. What would be your diagnosis?

1. Neurogenic tumor
2. Metastasis
3. Neurenteric cyst
4. Any of the above

Click here to see the answer

Findings: coronal and axial unenhanced CT show a posterior mediastinal mass (C-D, arrows). Of the three possible diagnosis, I would choose neurogenic tumor/cyst, because they are frequent in the posterior mediastinum.

Click here to see more images

MRI was done. Would you change your diagnosis?

1. Neurogenic tumor
2. Metastasis
3. Neurenteric cyst
4. Any of the above

Click here to see the answer

Findings: MRI discovers that the vertebral body is affected (E-F, arrows). This makes neurogenic tumor unlikely. There are visible vessels within the mass, which excludes a cyst. Since myxoid liposarcomas metastasize to the spine, the best possibility is metastasis.
At surgery, a metastatic focus from liposarcoma was found.

Final diagnosis: Metastasis from liposarcoma

This is an interesting case because in the PA radiograph the abnormality is partially hidden by the aortic knob and can be difficult to see (remember to use checklists!).

As a chest radiologist occupying the lower strata of the totem pole, I confess my profound ignorance of liposarcomas. Surfing the Internet I have discovered several papers that state that myxoid liposarcoma metastasizes frequently to the spine and that MRI is the method of choice to demonstrate vertebral metastases in these cases.
Now I can transmit my new-found knowledge to you.

Cáceres Corner Case 234 – Vignette

~ Dr. Pepe ~ 4 Comments

Dear Friends,

Today´s radiographs belong to a 48-year-old woman with aortic stenosis.

Most likely diagnosis:

1. Intrathoracic goiter
2. Aortic arch malformation
3. Neurogenic tumor
4. Any of the above

Click here to see the answer

Findings: PA radiograph shows a left mediastinal mass superimposed on the artic knob (A, arrow). The trachea is not displaced. In the lateral view the mass is in the anterior/middle mediastinum (B, arrows).
Regarding the diagnosis offered, the location excludes neurogenic tumor which usually arises in the posterior mediastinum. Intrathoracic goiter is a possibility, but the fact that part of it is the anterior mediastinum and that there is no tracheal displacement goes against this diagnosis. The location of the mass around the aortic knob plus knowing that the patient has aortic valve stenosis point to an aortic arch malformation.

Click here to see more images

Enhanced CT shows that the mass corresponds to a high aortic knob (C, arrow). An oblique view demonstrates the high knob (D, arrow) with a kink and angulation of the aorta representing the lower knob in the PA radiograph (D, red arrow).
My apologies for showing only 3-D images, but the CT was done during the lockdown and they are all I could get.
The patient has no collateral circulation. He had no systemic hypertension and no gradient across the zone of kinking.

Final diagnosis: aortic pseudocoarctation

Pseudocoarctation of the aorta occurs when the aortic arch originates from the 3rd arch, instead of the 4th. In this condition, the aortic arch is higher than usual, with a kinking at the union of the aortic arch and descending aorta, simulating aortic coarctation. Rib notching is absent and systemic hypertension is not present.
This is a rare condition is, but it is not unusual to see it in clinical practice.

To compensate for the lack of CT images in this case, I am showing another pseudocoarctation with similar findings (Fig 1).

Fig 1. PA chest radiograph shows a superior middle mediastinal mass (A, arrow), displacing the trachea. Mass is vaguely seen on the lateral view (B, circle). The most common diagnosis should be an endothoracic goiter but remember that a vascular structure should be always ruled out with enhanced CT.

Coronal CT demonstrates that the mass corresponds to a dilated aortic arch located higher than usual (C, arrow). On the oblique reconstruction, the high aneurysmatic aortic arch is well seen as well as the kinking at the junction with the descending aorta (D, red arrow).
Final diagnosis: aortic pseudocoarctation with aneurysm of the aortic arch.


Cáceres Corner Case 233 – Vignette

~ Dr. Pepe ~ 1 Comment

Dear Friends,

Recommendations for this week: A history of the world in 100 objects written by Neil McGregor, Director of the British Museum. Series: Good omens (Amazon). 

Today’s radiographs belong to a 51-year-old man with moderate cough.
 
Do you see any abnormality?
If so, where?

1.  Upper third
2. Middle third
3. Lower third
4. Don’t see it

Click here to see the answer

Findings: PA radiograph shows a left parahilar opacity (A, arrow), seen as an anterior elongated opacity in the lateral view (B, arrow). Its shape in the lateral view suggests mucous impaction.

Click here to see more images

Enhanced CT was done. What would be your diagnosis?

1. Benign endobronchial tumor
2. Allergic aspergillosis
3. Foreign body
4. None of the above

Click here to see the answer

Findings: enhanced axial CT shows an endobronchial obstruction with a distal mucous impaction (C, arrow), also visible in the coronal reconstruction (D, arrow). The clue to the diagnosis lies in recognizing two small lung nodules in the axial view ( C, red arrows) and another one in the right lung in the coronal view (D, red arrow). In addition, there is an enhancing nodule in the gallbladder (D, yellow arrow). These findings suggest widespread malignancy and the correct answer should be 4. None of the above.

Click here to see more images

Bronchoscopy discovered a dark tumor in the lingular bronchus (E), as well as numerous small implants in the trachea, also visible in the CT (F, arrow).
Review of the clinical history discovered that the patient had been operated on for melanoma of the back four years earlier.

Final diagnosis: widespread metastases from melanoma, one of them causing bronchial mucous impaction

Mucous impactions may be multiple or localized. Multiple impactions are related to respiratory diseases that cause bronchiectasis and thick mucus (allergic aspergillosis, cystic fibrosis) whereas localized ones are secondary to segmental endobronchial lesions.

The prevalence of bronchogenic carcinoma makes it the most common cause of localized mucus impaction in clinical practice. Other malignant tumoral lesions are metastases and carcinoids.

Endobronchial metastases represent about 2% of lung metastases. They are usually accompanied by metastatic nodules. They may occur in association with any tumor, but the most common sources are colon, breast, kidney and melanoma.

Cáceres Corner Case 230 – Vignette

~ Dr. Pepe ~ Leave a comment

Dear friends,

Today’s radiographs belong to a 27-year-old with dyspnea.

Diagnosis:

1. Giant bulla
2. Emphysema
3. Loculated pneumothorax
4. Any of the above

Click here to see the answer

Findings: PA radiograph shows overinflation of the lower right lung pushing the minor fissure upward (A, arrow), simulating partial RUL collapse. In the lateral view there is a circular line (B, red arrows) suggesting the wall of a giant bulla. The correct diagnosis is made by detecting overinflation of the left lower lung and scarce vascularity, an indication that we are not dealing with localized disease of RLL (giant bulla or pneumothorax) but with disease of both lower lobes. Therefore the correct diagnosis should be 3. Emphysema.

Another finding in favor of emphysema of lower lobes is redistribution of the pulmonary circulation in which the diameter of the vessels of upper lobes (B) is larger than those of the lower lobes (C).
Pulmonary vascular redistribution is usually due to cardiac failure but it may also occur in emphysema of lower lobes in which vascular flow is redirected to the functioning upper lobes.

Click here to see more images

Unenhanced axial CT confirm the relative sparing of upper lobes (D) and the severe emphysematous changes of lower lobes (E).

Coronal CT (F) shows severe emphysema of lower lobes and increased vascularity of upper lobes as well as discrete bronchial dilatations. Sagittal reconstruction demonstrates that the apparent wall of a bulla seen in the lateral chest radiograph represents the minor and major fissures (G, arrows) limiting a markedly emphysematous right middle lobe.

Diagnosis: Pulmonary emphysema secondary to alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency.

This condition affects young persons and causes severe emphysema of lower lobes and bronchial dilatations.

I am showing this case because is a good example of satisfaction of search (missing changes of the left lower lobe will lead you to the wrong diagnosis).
It is also a nice example of vascular redistribution secondary to pulmonary disease.

Cáceres Corner Case 229 – Vignette

~ Dr. Pepe ~ Leave a comment

Hello friends,

After three weeks of confinement I believe I have seen all TV series available. If you like Sci-Fi I recommend The Expanse (Amazon Video) and for older citizens The Kominsky method(Netflix).

Today’s case was sent to me from my hospital in the early days of lockdown. The scout film belongs to a 78-year-old man with doubtful COVID-19 infection.
Do you see any abnormality?
If so, where is it?

1. Chest
2. Abdomen
3. Chest and abdomen
4. Don’t see it

Click here to see the answer

Findings: There is a rounded right mediastinal opacity at the junction of the trachea and right main bronchus (A, arrow). There is an apparent abdominal RUQ mass (A, red arrows) with an area of lesser opacity in the center (A, yellow arrow).
The correct answer would be number 3. Visible abnormalities in chest and abdomen

With these findings what would be your diagnosis?

1. Enlarged azygos arch
2. Azygos continuation of IVC
3. Right-sided stomach
4. All of the above

Click here to see the answer

The clue to the diagnosis resides in the apparent RUQ abdominal mass. The shape suggests a right-side stomach, with air in the antrum and duodenal bulb and lesser amount of air in the fornix (Fig A). Findings are better seen in the drawing (B).

A right-sided stomach with a normal-positioned heart is highly suggestive of a congenital abnormality, levocardia with abdominal situs inversus. In this malformation the chest structures are in their normal location, whereas the abdominal viscera are rotated 180 degrees.
This malformation is accompanied by partial interruption of the IVC and azygos continuation, which results in an enlarged azygos arch.
Therefore the correct answer is 4. All of the above

Click here to see the more images

Enhanced axial CT confirms the enlarged azygos arch (A, arrow). Coronal reconstruction demonstrates the dilated ascending azygos vein (B, arrows)

Axial images of the upper abdomen show the gastric fornix in the RUQ (C-D, arrows) as well as a normal left-sided heart (C) and a mid-line liver (D). There is a small splenic remnant in the RUQ (D, red arrow).

Final diagnosis: Levocardia with abdominal situs inversus

I am showing this case because this is our fourth patient with levocardia and abdominal situs inversus seen in the last four years (see Caceres´ corner cases 178 & 194 and Dr. Pepe´s Summer case 1). It may not be as rare as the textbooks state. In addition, the diagnosis can be suggested in the plain film if we discover the right-sided stomach.

Cáceres Corner Case 228 – Vignette

~ Dr. Pepe ~ 2 Comments

Dear Friends,

Today I am showing a preoperative chest radiograph for varices of a 60-year-old woman.
Do you see any abnormality?
If so, where is it?

1. Lung
2. Mediastinum
3. Pleura/chest wall
4. Don’t see it

Click here to see the answer

Findings: There are bilateral convex opacities in the lower mediastinum (A, arrows), better seen in the cone down view (B, arrows). The appearance suggests a lower central mediastinal mass and the most likely diagnosis should be hiatus hernia. A fact against this diagnosis is the gastric fornix in its normal location (A, red arrow).

What would you recommend:

1. Lateral view of the chest
2. Esophagogram
3. Chest CT
4. None of the above

Click here to see the answer

In my opinion, the best choice is a lateral view, which shows poor definition of the body of the eleventh dorsal vertebra with a sharp angulation of the spine (C, circle). There is no evidence of hiatus hernia.

Click here to see the more images

AP cone down view of the lower thoracic spine shows a butterfly deformity of D11 (D, circle) with the outer borders accounting for the convexities visible in the chest radiograph. Lateral cone down view confirms marked flattening and collapse of the vertebral body (E, circle)

The patient had been involved in a car accident five years ago resulting in a burst compression fracture of D11. Comparison with previous radiographs did nor show any change.

Final diagnosis: Traumatic compression fracture of D11, stable

Teaching point: Remember that not all opacities in the lower mediastinum in the PA view are hiatus hernias. A lateral view places them in the correct compartment and helps to clarify the etiology.

Cáceres Corner Case 227 – Vignette

~ Dr. Pepe ~ Leave a comment

Dear friends, starting today I plan to show simple teaching cases (vignettes) hoping to ease the boredom of the confinement.
I will show two cases every week (Monday and Thursday). To make the presentation more agile the diagnosis will be included. If you get impatient all you have to do is press the answer button.

The first case is a routine control PA radiograph in a 67-year-old woman operated on for breast carcinoma three years ago.

Question: Do you suspect any bone metastasis?

Click here to see the answer

Findings: There is an apparent lytic lesion in the distal end of the right clavicle (A, arrow), better seen in the cone down view (B, arrow).

When I saw this case two months ago, I could not determine whether the lesion was real or not. What would you do?
 
1. Compare with previous films
2. Call the oncologist
3. PET-CT
4. Bone scintigraphy

Click here to see the answer

In my opinion, the first thing to do was comparing with previous films although
this brilliant idea was hampered by the technician placing the marker in top of the distal clavicle in two earlier radiographs (C-D).

What would you do now?
1. Bone scintigraphy
2. Call the oncologist
3. PET-CT
4. CT

Click here to see the answer

Since I was not sure about the lesion, I decided to call the oncologist to find out if she suspected any metastasis and if the patient had any pain in the right acromioclavicular area. The answer was negative. What would you recommend?

1. Bone scintigraphy
2. CT
3. PET-CT
4. Radiograph of the right clavicle

click here to see the answer

In my opinion the fastest way to clarify the diagnosis was to take a radiograph of both clavicles (with the left for comparison). The distal end of the right clavicle has a normal appearance and , since the patient had no local symptoms, no further studies were needed.

Final diagnosis: normal variant simulating pathology in an oncologic patient

I have seen several chest radiographs with apparent lytic lesion of the distal clavicle that turned out to be normal. It is described in the Atlas of normal variants by Keats. In this case I was doubtful because the patient had a carcinoma and the appearance of the lesion was ominous.
 
There are two teaching points in this case:
1. Talking to the referring physician is important to determine the management of findings.
2. A simple and inexpensive procedure clarified the diagnosis and avoided unnecessary additional studies.

Cáceres’ Corner Case 226 – SOLVED

~ Dr. Pepe ~ 12 Comments

Dear Friends,

Today’s radiographs belong to a 27-year-old woman who came for a routine check-up.

Most likely diagnosis:

1. Thymic tumor
2. Enlarged lymph nodes
3. Aortic arch malformation
4. None of the above

CT images will be shown next Wednesday.

Click here to see the first images

Dear Friends,

Today I am showing enhanced CT images of the mediastinum in the early (A-B) and late phases (C-E).
What do you think?

Click here to see more images

Click here to see the answer

Findings: PA chest radiograph shows a right upper mediastinal mass with undulated border (A, arrow). There is increased opacity of the anterior clear space in the lateral view (B, circle). In my opinion, the most likely diagnosis would be thymic tumor, although the undulated border favors enlarged lymph nodes.

Enhanced axial CTs in the arterial phase show an anterior mediastinal mass with minimal enhancement (C-D, arrows) and a vascular space in the center (C, yellow arrow).

Coronal and axial CTs in the late phase show partial washout of the vascular space (E, yellow arrow). The clue to the diagnosis lies in the presence of several punctate calcifications within the mass (F-G, red arrows) consistent with phleboliths, which are practically diagnostic of hemangioma. The central vascular space also supports the diagnosis.

The patient had been diagnosed of mediastinal hemangioma two years earlier and comparison with previous chest films and CTs did not show any change.
 
Final diagnosis: Mediastinal hemangioma
 
Congratulations to Naegleria and MK who gave similar diagnosis both at exactly 12:55 P.M.
 
Teaching point: This case is unusual (I have seen only two of them in the mediastinum) but can be easily diagnosed if phleboliths are present (and recognized). Early in my residency I learned that, when finding phleboliths within a mass, the diagnosis should be hemangioma until proven otherwise.
 
Ref. HP McAdams, ML Rosado de Christenson, CA Moran. Mediastinal hemangioma: radiographic and CT features in 14 patients. Radiology 1994; 193:399-402

Cáceres’ Corner Case 225 – SOLVED

~ Dr. Pepe ~ 4 Comments

Dear Friends,

Today’s radiographs belong to a 37-year-old man with moderate fever.
What do you think?

Come back on Friday to see the answer!

Click here to see the answer

Findings: Chest radiographs show an intrapulmonary rounded opacity with ill-defined borders in the left lung (A-B, arrows). In a patient with fever and no other significant symptoms, the most likely diagnosis should be rounded pneumonia, although I was somewhat concerned about the good definition of the lower contour in the lateral view (B, red arrows), which is unusual in pneumonia.

The patient improved with treatment and follow-up radiographs four weeks later show only minimal residual findings in the PA view (C, arrow).

Final diagnosis: rounded pneumonia simulating a pulmonary mass.

Congratulations to Ahmad, who was the first to give the correct diagnosis. Silver medal to Sara Mercado/span>, who arrived second three hours later.

Teaching point: remember that not all pulmonary nodules/masses are malignant. If you want to know more about them, look up Diploma #51 “Innocuous pulmonary nodules”

Cáceres’ Corner Case 224 – SOLVED

~ Dr. Pepe ~ 8 Comments

Dear Friends,

Due to the coronavirus scare, Dr Pepe and Miss Piggy have eloped to the Bahamas, leaving me alone in charge of the blog. Until his return in late March, I will present interesting cases in the Caceres’ Corner. I may even dare to present a Diploma case, although I am not as knowledgeable as Dr Pepe.

This week’s case is a preoperative PA radiograph of a 47-year-old woman.

Diagnosis:

1. Double aortic arch
2. Enlarged azygos vein
3. Mediastinal mass
4. None of the above

What do you see? Come back on Friday to see the answer!

Click here to see the answer

Findings: PA shows a right mediastinal bump at the confluence between the trachea and the RUL bronchus (A, arrow). There is a curved mediastinal line below (A, red arrow) and an extra mediastinal line in the left lower mediastinal border (A, yellow arrow).

The combination of these findings strongly suggests increased circulation in the azygos system, with prominent azygos and hemiazygos veins. In an asymptomatic patient the most likely diagnosis is a congenital interruption of the IVC with azygos continuation.
A double aortic arch can be ruled out because the right component raises higher than the left, and in this case the opposite occurs.

Unenhanced coronal CT confirms the dilated azygos arch (B, arrow) and the dilated ascending azygos (B-C, red arrows) and hemiazygos (C, yellow arrow)

Final diagnosis: Congenital interruption of the IVC with azygos continuation.
 
Congratulations to Hazem who was the first to give the correct answer and to Krister who gave a nice and accurate description of the findings.
 
Teaching point: this case is a good example of non-significant findings secondary to a congenital malformation, as mentioned in webinar eight.