A Case of Maturing Perineal Lipoblastoma in an Infant

Abstract

Objective: To report the unusual occurrence of a perineal lipoblastoma presenting as a painless enlarging mass in an infant. Case Presentation and Intervention: A 7-month-old boy presented with a 6-month history of an asymptomatic progressively enlarging perineal mass. Imaging studies were unable to provide a diagnosis. Complete resection of the mass was achieved and there was no recurrence at 18-month follow-up. Histopathologic findings were consistent with a maturing perineal lipoblastoma. Conclusion: This case report serves as a reminder to physicians and especially pediatric surgeons to consider perineal lipoblastoma in the differential diagnosis of soft tissue perineal masses in infancy.

A giant mesenteric lipoblastoma in an 18-month old infant: A case report and review of the literature

“…Ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) complement each other, but seldom can they determine whether the tumor is benign or malignant. [17] Our patient was admitted to the operating theater based on his clinical picture, physical examination, and CT findings, but the histopathologic and cytogenetic studies established the diagnosis. Lipoblastoma has prominent lobulation, no nuclear atypia, or pleomorphism.…”

“…No metastasis has been reported until today. [17] Complete surgical excision is curative with no recurrence. In histologically borderline cases, the tumor karyotype is of diagnostic value in order to differentiate with liposarcoma.…”

Endoscopic Management of Pediatric Foreign Body Ingestions and Food Bolus Impactions: A Retrospective Study from a Tertiary Care Center

“…1 In our present study, FB and food bolus impactions were found in 242 and 11 patients, respectively, out of 368 patients (68.75%), which differs from western studies that reported FBs in the range of 80%. 2 17 18 19 20 21 This inconsistency could be related to delay in referral from the outlying hospitals for endoscopic procedure resulting in a high likelihood of spontaneous passage of FB through the digestive tract with time. Of the total 253 patients with FB ingestion in our study, 67% were aged less than 3 years.…”

“…Also, emergency endoscopic retrieval was undertaken in those presenting with symptoms of complete esophageal obstruction or dyspnea and those with sharp pointed objects in the upper digestive tract in accordance with other studies. 3 21 Patients with BBs and other FBs (except sharp objects) in the stomach were subjected to endoscopy on an average of 6.2 hours from the time of their arrival to the ED (range: 2–8 hours).…”

“…Endoscopic intervention was successful in 97.63% ( n = 247) of our patients but failed in 6 patients, which is comparable to other studies. 21 22 Patients in whom endoscopic retrieval was unsuccessful included five children with impacted BBs and one child with fish bone who developed retropharyngeal abscess needing surgical drainage and intravenous antibiotics. While the stomach was the most common site of FB, the most common site of FB and food bolus impactions was the esophagus given its narrow lumen.…”