ABSTRACT
(1) Introduction: Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is a life-threatening condition and often a diagnostic challenge. It has recently been classified as a hematopoietic tumour, and the cases of ECD reported in the literature has dramatically increased during the last 15 years. (2) Methods: We describe the case of a 57-year-old male patient with severe gynecomastia, with a detailed description of his diagnostic iter and consequent surgical operation. We provide the first systematic review of the literature of breast involvement in ECD, following PRISMA guidelines, including 13 studies and 16 patients. (3) Results: Our report resulted to be the first case of gynecomastia as a single clinical and imaging feature of ECD described in English literature. A total of 81.3% of patients included were female. Among them, 76.9% had unilateral and nodular presentation, while male patients presented bilateral heterogeneous breast enlargement. Globally, 87.5% expressed breast alterations as their first manifestations of ECD. Only 50% presented skeletal involvement. (4) Conclusion: The reported case represents a unique addition to the literature. We found two different patterns in ECD-related breast involvement between male and female patients, an unusual M/F ratio, and a lower rate of bone involvement. Breast involvement is frequently the first clinical feature; therefore, breast caregivers should be aware of this dangerous and most likely underestimated condition.
ABSTRACT
(1) Background: The role of the umbilical scar and its repositioning remains one of the most important surgical steps in the execution of any type of abdominoplasty, including those involving "inverted-t" or "fleur de lys" incisions. A consequence of this is a surgeon's Hamletic dilemma: to keep or not to keep the original umbilical scar? (2) Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted on all patients undergoing "T-inverted" abdominoplasty at the Department of Plastic Surgery of the Santa Maria alle Scotte University Hospital, Siena, between January 2018 and December 2020. Twelve months after the surgery we submitted to all patients the U-score questionnaire about their feelings about their umbilicus's appearance. Patients could assign a score from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 4 (very satisfied) to each of the five items of the score. (3) Results: The average of the scores attributed by the nine patients in whom the navel was preserved is 13 (Range 10-17), while in patients on whom a navel reconstruction was performed, the mean score is 16.8 (Range 12-20). The mean score of patients with a reconstructed umbilicus is, therefore, statistically higher than that of the other group of patients (t-value = 3.88, p = 0.000374) with an average increase of 3.8 points. (4) Conclusions: We can state that the reconstruction of a new navel is the right answer to the Hamletic dilemma in patients having undergone vertical or anchor abdominoplasty.
