ABSTRACT
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Asthma/epidemiology , Asthma/prevention & control , Status Asthmaticus/epidemiology , Status Asthmaticus/prevention & control , Societies, Medical/standards , Societies, Medical/trends , Societies, Medical , Asthma/immunology , Status Asthmaticus/immunology , Societies, Medical/history , Societies, Medical/organization & administrationABSTRACT
Introducción: El Hamartoma respiratorio adenoepitelial (HRA) es una lesión poco común de la nariz y los senos paranasales caracterizada por la formación anormal de tejido glandular. Fue descrita por primera vez por Wenig y cols., en 1995 y, desde entonces, tan sólo se ha publicado unos 60 casos. Material y métodos: En este trabajo, presentamos el estudio de seis casos de hamartoma de cavidad nasal, los cuales fueron diagnosticados y tratados en nuestro Centro entre los años 2005 y 2010. Asimismo, realizamos un estudio completo del diagnóstico diferencial de esta patología, tanto a nivel clínico como anatomopatológico. Resultados: En estos pacientes, la razón hombre: mujer fue 5:1, con una media de edad de 63,1 años (DE=16,9). Todos los sujetos presentaron afectación de la fosa nasal y, en tres casos, ocupación de los senos maxilar, frontal y etmoidal. Los síntomas más frecuentes fueron obstrucción nasal, rinorrea y pérdida de olfato. Todos los casos fueron tratados mediante cirugia endoscópica nasosinusal sin evidencia de recirrencia en el periodo de seguimimento (28,2 meses, DE=11,5). Las características más importantes del HRA son: edema estromal, proliferación glandular seromucosa, proliferación fibroblástica y vascular, infiltrado inflamatorio mixto, incremento de la proliferación adenomatoide, acúmulo de material glandular y cambios atróficos del epitelio. Conclusión: Sugerimos que el diagnóstico diferencial debe realizarse con la poliposis nasosinusal, pólipo antrocoanal, papiloma invertido y adenocarcinoma. Un diagnóstico incorrecto podría dar lugar a un tratamiento demasiado agresivo. Esta revisión de los casos publicados, con énfasis en el diagnóstico diferencial es de interés tanto para otorrinolarigólogos como anatomopatólogos (AU)
Introduction: Respiratory epithelial adenomatoid hamartoma (REAH) is an uncommon lesion of the nasal and paranasal sinuses. It was first described in 1995 by Wenig and Heffner, and only about 60 cases have been published since then. Material and methods: We present 6 case studies of nasal cavity hamartoma diagnosed and treated at our institution between 2005 and 2010. We also conducted a literature review and comprehensive study of the differential diagnosis of this condition, both clinical and pathological. Results: The male-female ratio was 5:1, with a mean age of 63.1 years. The most frequent symptoms were nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea and loss of smell. All cases were treated with endoscopic sinus surgery, without recurrences in the follow-up period (28.2 months; SD=11.5 months). Conclusion: We suggest that differential diagnosis should be made on the basis of nasal polyps, antrochoanal polyps, inverted papilloma and low-grade adenocarcinoma. This review of published cases is of equal interest to both pathologists and otorhinolaryngologists (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Hamartoma/diagnosis , Otorhinolaryngologic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Diagnosis, Differential , Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Paranasal Sinus Neoplasms/diagnosis , Nasal Polyps/diagnosis , Adenomatous Polyps/diagnosisABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Respiratory epithelial adenomatoid hamartoma (REAH) is an uncommon lesion of the nasal and paranasal sinuses. It was first described in 1995 by Wenig and Heffner, and only about 60 cases have been published since then. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We present 6 case studies of nasal cavity hamartoma diagnosed and treated at our institution between 2005 and 2010. We also conducted a literature review and comprehensive study of the differential diagnosis of this condition, both clinical and pathological. RESULTS: The male-female ratio was 5:1, with a mean age of 63.1 years. The most frequent symptoms were nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea and loss of smell. All cases were treated with endoscopic sinus surgery, without recurrences in the follow-up period (28.2 months; SD=11.5 months). CONCLUSION: We suggest that differential diagnosis should be made on the basis of nasal polyps, antrochoanal polyps, inverted papilloma and low-grade adenocarcinoma. This review of published cases is of equal interest to both pathologists and otorhinolaryngologists.
