2018
DOI: 10.1177/2050313x18770936
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Giant peritoneal loose body in a patient with end-stage renal disease

Abstract: A 72-year-old male with end-stage renal disease underwent a computed tomography scan to assess renal function. An oval-shaped mass, 50 mm × 60 mm in size, was discovered incidentally in his recto-vesical pouch. Because it was suspected to be a teratoma, which could be an impediment for future renal transplantation, surgery was performed. It revealed a giant peritoneal loose body, a rare entity, that has not been reported before in patients with renal chronic insufficiency.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 15 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In some instances, they have been documented to grow larger than 5 cm in diameter, secondary to absorption of protein in peritoneal fluid. 5 Although peritoneal loose bodies are fairly uncommon, and are often discovered incidentally, 6 it should be noted that the possibility for compressive complications exists, and the differential of possible non-benign primary or metastatic lesions should be entertained. The differential diagnosis includes calcified uterine fibroids, desmoid tumours, teratomas, fecaliths or even metastasis from ovarian cancer that should be considered in the appropriate patient population, and the need for further cross-sectional imaging or intervention individualised depending on the certainty of the diagnosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some instances, they have been documented to grow larger than 5 cm in diameter, secondary to absorption of protein in peritoneal fluid. 5 Although peritoneal loose bodies are fairly uncommon, and are often discovered incidentally, 6 it should be noted that the possibility for compressive complications exists, and the differential of possible non-benign primary or metastatic lesions should be entertained. The differential diagnosis includes calcified uterine fibroids, desmoid tumours, teratomas, fecaliths or even metastasis from ovarian cancer that should be considered in the appropriate patient population, and the need for further cross-sectional imaging or intervention individualised depending on the certainty of the diagnosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%