Background Eosinophilic cystitis (EC) is a rare inflammatory urinary bladder disorder whose etiology, pathogenesis, and treatment are unknown. The work aims to evaluate the clinical manifestations, cystoscopic characteristics, pathological features, treatment, and clinical outcome of EC patients. Materials and methods The clinical records and histopathology material of 22 patients diagnosed as EC during ten years were reviewed and analyzed for patient's age, sex, clinical data, cystoscopic features, biopsy procedures, treatment plan, follow-up, and prognosis. Frequencies, normality tests, descriptive statistics, and correlations were run. Results The mean age of patients was 46.5 + 17 years, 12 females and 10 males. Regarding the patient's complaints, dysuria was the most frequent main symptom, followed by hematuria. On cystoscopic examination, bladder mass was seen in 54.5% of patients. Six patients (27.3%) were associated with different allergic diseases; however peripheral eosinophilia was shown in two patients (9.1%). All cases revealed predominance of eosinophilic infiltration on microscopic examination. The most commonly used medications were corticosteroids for 72.7% of patients with tapering dose giving a significant improvement with a recorded recurrence in one patient after 12 months from the first lesion. Conclusions No specific clinical presentation for EC patients and histopathology is the standard diagnostic tool. Medical treatment including corticosteroids was the first line with good prognosis, although recurrence remains a possibility which emphasizes the importance of patients’ follow-up.

Background This study identifies the incidence of appendiceal Enterobius vermicularis (E.v) infestation in all the patients undergoing appendectomy and evaluates the relationship between E. v infestation of the appendix and the acute appendicitis. Method ology: All the routinely examined appendectomy specimens received in the pathology laboratory of a referral hospital over a three year period of time were reviewed for the existence of E. v. These cases were evaluated for clinico-laboratory characterization. Results Out of 1150 appendectomies for clinical acute appendicitis picture, 31 (2.7%) cases revealed E. v infestation. The age ranged from 6 to 42 years old but more than 80% of the E. v infected cases were children. Twenty four cases (77.4%) did not show any other appendiceal pathology, six cases showed lymphoid hyperplasia and only one case showed concomitant histological acute inflammatory process. Conclusion E. v infestation is an incidental finding during histopathology examination of appendectomy specimens for patients with clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis, however there is no relation between the existence of E. v and occurrence of acute appendicitis which is the main indication for appendectomy, so further studies are recommended to reach out earlier diagnosis to eliminate the unnecessary surgical intervention. Also surgeons should consider E. v as a differential diagnosis when removing a normal looking appendix to take the necessary precautions for minimizing any chance of contamination and sending all the normal looking appendectomy specimens for histopathology examination.

Highlights Poroma affects gluteal skin. Trauma is a possible cause. We recommend excision and pathology.

Background Healthcare workers have a higher risk of acquiring coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The process of requesting pathological investigations is usually handled manually through paper-based forms. This study evaluated the potential for paper-based request forms to transmit severe acute respiratory virus coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) to laboratory staff in order to make recommendations for dealing with hospital paperwork in a post-COVID-19 world. Methods Paper-based forms were tracked from the time of test ordering until the release of the pathology report by calculating the time taken for the forms to reach the laboratory, and the exposure of each staff group to forms received from both high and moderate COVID-19 risk areas. Results Four hundred and thirty-two (83%) of 520 forms were received in the laboratory within 24 h. The remaining 88 (17%) forms took ≥24 h to be handled by laboratory personnel. The mean daily exposure time to the paperwork for various laboratory staff was as follows: receptionists, 2.7 min; technicians, 5.5 min; and pathologists, 54.6 min. Conclusion More than 80% of the forms were handled by laboratory personnel within 24 h, carrying a high potential risk for viral transmission. It is recommended that paper-based request forms should be replaced by electronic requests that could be printed in the laboratory if required. Another option would be to sterilize received paperwork to ensure the safety of laboratory personnel. More studies are needed to detect the stability of SARS-CoV-2 on different surfaces and determine the potential risk of COVID-19 transmission via paper.

No abstract

Background: Appendectomy is the most commonly performed surgical procedure worldwide to manage appendicitis. The practice of sending all appendices specimens for routine histopathology examination depends on the concerned clinician. This study was performed to reveal the importance of routine histopathology examination of the appendectomy specimens with recording of the occurrence and distribution of unusual pathologic findings Methods: This was a retrospective record based comparative study performed in a single Hospital in Saudi Arabia, where the medical files of 766 patients were recruited. The appendectomy specimens were obtained either from our hospital or referred from any other hospital for histopathology examination. All the unusual diagnoses were reviewed by the histopathology author and blindly re-evaluated by other pathology consultant. Statistic analysis was performed manually. Result: 700 cases were within the usual histopathology scope. Unusual histopathological findings were observed in 66 cases (8.6%): four cases of mucinous neoplasms, 20 cases of fibrous obliteration or appendiceal neuroma, 18 cases showed parasitic infestation, and 24 cases were periappendicitis without appendicular acute inflammation. Conclusion: Routine histopathology examination of the appendix not only confirms the clinical diagnosis of acute appendicitis, but also leads to the incidental diagnosis of much unusual pathologies which could have been missed by the surgeon, and these pathologies include parasitic infestation, peri-appendicitis, neuromas and appendiceal mucinous neoplasms.

Fallopian tubal molar pregnancy is extremely rare, and the main diagnostic tool is the post-operative histopathological diagnosis, as the pre-operative diagnosis is difficult. We report a case of ectopic partial molar pregnancy in the right fallopian tube of a 35-year-old lady that was sent for routine histopathological examination with the clinical diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy and the histopathology report revealed an unusual result.

No abstract