[Giant lipomas or retroperitoneal liposarcomas? Controversies in their diagnosis and treatment]. / ¿Lipoma gigante o liposarcoma retroperitoneal? Controversias en su diagnóstico y tratamiento.

BACKGROUND: Retroperitoneal lipomas are extremely rare tumors that must be differentiated from well-differentiated liposarcomas (WD-LPS). OBJECTIVES: To summarize the evidence about giant retroperitoneal lipomas or liposarcomas; and to elaborate recommendations for their management. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search from January 1985 to December 2019 and a review of our own cases was performed. RESULTS: Our series comprises four patients, two females and two males. The diagnosis was incidental in two cases. The medium size was 26 cm, being two cases located exclusively in the retroperitoneum, one in the inguinal region and one in the buttock via pelvic space. All cases were surgically removed being confirmed the initial diagnosis of retroperitoneal lipomas in two cases, as the rest two cases were classified as WD_LPS after MDM2/CDK4 genetic analysis. The review of the available literature plus our own cases revealed 30 cases, of which 58% were woman. Only two cases were asymptomatic. The main symptom was abdominal mass (53%) followed by abdominal pain (40,6%). The median size of the lesions was 24,9 cm with a median weight of 4.576,3 g. All cases were surgically removed, being necessary to remove contiguous organs in only four cases (12,5%). CONCLUSIONS: Retroperitoneal lipoma is a rare tumor which must be differentiated from WD-LPS. This is a very difficult task, being necessary to determinate MDM2 status (by FISH or MLPA), present in liposarcoma but not in lipomas, for its correct diagnosis. The treatment must be based on a complete surgical resection with negative margins.

Risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and extended-spectrum Beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales in patients with diabetic foot infections requiring hospital admission / Factores de riesgo de infección por Staphylococcus aureus resistente a meticilina y enterobacterias productoras de betalactamasas en infecciones de pie diabético que requieren hospitalización

OBJETIVO: Staphylococcus aureus resistente a meticilina (MRSA) y las enterobacterias productoras de betalactamasas (ESBL-E) pueden complicar el tratamiento de las infecciones del pie del diabético (DFIs). El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar los factores de riesgo de las infecciones por estos microorganismos en el pie del diabético. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estudio observacional prospectivo de 167 pacientes consecutivos con infecciones del pie del diabético. El diagnóstico y gravedad de las infecciones se basó en la guía de la Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA). Para identificar los factores de riesgo de las infecciones por MRSA y (ESBL-E) se llevó a cabo mediante un estudio multivariante. RESULTADOS: S. aureus fue el microorganismo más aislado (n= 82; 37,9 %) seguido por Escherichia coli (n= 40; 18,5%). El 57,3% de S. aureus fueron MRSA y el 70% de Klebsiella pneumoniae y el 25% de E. coli eran productores ESBL, respetivamente. Los factores de riesgo independientes de las infecciones por MRSA fueron las úlceras profundas [OR 8,563; IC 95% (1,068-4,727)], uso previo de fluoroquinolonas [OR 2,78; IC 95% (1,156-6,685)] y la vasculopatía periférica [OR 2,47; IC 95% (1.068-4.727)], mientras que para las infecciones por (ESBL-E) lo fueron osteomielitis [OR 6,351; 95% IC 95% (1,609-25,068)] y el uso previo de cefalosporinas [OR 5,824; IC 95% (1,517-22,361)]. CONCLUSIONES: MRSA y ESBL-E han adquirido una gran relevancia clínica en las DFIs. La disponibilidad de sus factores de riesgo es muy conveniente para elegir el tratamiento empírico en las formas graves

PURPOSE: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and extended-spectrum Beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales (ESBL-E) may complicate the treatment of diabetic foot infections (DFIs). The aim of this study was to determine the risk factors for these pathogens in DFIs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of 167 consecutive adult patients with DFIs. The diagnosis and severity of DFIs were based on the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) classification system. Multivariate analyses were performed in order to identify risk factors for MRSA and ESBL-E infections. RESULTS: S. aureus was the most isolated pathogen (n=82, 37.9 %) followed by Escherichia coli (n= 40, 18.5%). MRSA accounted for 57.3% of all S. aureus and 70% of Klebsiella pneumoniae and 25% of E. coli were ESBL producers, respectively. Deep ulcer [OR 8,563; 95% CI (1,068-4,727)], previous use of fluoroquinolones [OR 2,78; 95% CI (1,156-6,685)] and peripheral vasculopathy [OR 2,47; 95% CI (1.068-4.727)] were the independent predictors for MRSA infections; and osteomyelitis [OR 6,351; 95% CI (1,609-25,068)] and previous use of cephalosporins [OR 5,824; 95% CI (1,517-22,361)] for ESBL-E infections. CONCLUSIONS: MRSA and ESBL-E have adquired a great clinical relevance in DFIs. The availability of their risk factors is very convenient to choose the empirical treatment in severe forms

Utility of frozen-section examination for diagnosis of malignancy associated with multinodular goiter.

BACKGROUND: Frozen-section examination (FSE) has traditionally been used for the intraoperative diagnosis of thyroid cancer. However, the utility of the technique is now controversial, especially in multinodular goiter (MNG), on which there are few studies. The aim of this study was to analyze the utility of FSE for ruling out malignancy in patients undergoing surgery for MNG. PATIENTS AND METHODS: FSE was performed in 197 patients with MNGs undergoing surgery for suspected malignancy, either preoperatively (n = 145; 74%) or intraoperatively (n = 52; 26%), and where the preoperatively planned surgical technique was partial resectional surgery. The FSE diagnosis was classified as benign, suggestive of malignancy, or malignant. The following FSE parameters were calculated for diagnosing MNG-associated carcinoma: true- and false-positives and true- and false-negatives, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy. The chi2 and Student's t tests were applied. RESULTS: The FSE revealed benignity in 191 cases (97%), suggested malignancy in 3 (1.5%), and were malignant in the remaining 3. The final histology revealed 16 carcinomas (8%), of which only 3 were detected by FSE. Only tumor size was a factor significantly associated with FSE carcinoma detection (p = 0.0012). The sensitivity of the technique for detecting carcinoma was 19%, specificity, 100%; positive predictive value, 100%; negative predictive value, 93%; and diagnostic accuracy, 93%. CONCLUSIONS: FSE should not be used routinely in the management of MNG, and considering its low rate of sensitivity for detecting malignancy, the decision on the extent of the thyroidectomy should be based on other factors and explorations.