Migrating pleural plaque in a patient with asbestos induced pleural disease: a case report

Abstract

BackgroundHealth surveillance of formerly asbestos exposed individuals focus on early detection of asbestos related diseases, such as lung fibrosis (asbestosis), pleural plaques, mesothelioma and lung cancer in particular. One main concern is the early and clear identification of lesions with a high risk of malignant changes and their undelayed clinical work-up. False positive results may lead to unnecessary and often painful diagnostic interventions, which create high costs when applied to a large cohort and also may discredit the whole program. We describe an unusual presentation of a common lesion among asbestos exposed individuals, which has to our knowledge never been described before. Being aware of this pathological pathway may prevent inadequate clinical decisions with disadvantages for the patient. Underlying implications regarding health surveillance and the reading of CT-scans of the thorax are important for the management of formerly asbestos exposed individuals.Case presentationDuring follow-up of an asbestos exposed 72 year old former power plant worker with known pleural changes, a nodule located next to the left costophrenic angle was newly discovered on CT-scan. As the previous scan 1 year before did not show any changes in that area, a fast growing tumour was suspected and an immediate biopsy performed. The tissue showed the characteristics of a pleural plaque with no signs of malignancy. After carefully reviewing all previous radiographs a rounded opacity attached to the mediastinal pleura close to the oesophagus and slightly cranial to the position of the removed nodule could be discerned. That nodule had increased in size over several years and was no longer visible on the latest scan. It appeared that the originally slow growing plaque had migrated to the costophrenic angle some time before it was discovered in the latest scan thus imposing as a fast growing tumour.ConclusionsWe concluded that asbestos related pleural plaques can under special circumstances get separated from the pleura and migrate to another position in the pleural cavity. The case provides new insights in the development and properties of pleural lesions and may offer new options for the management of formerly asbestos exposed patients.

Der Biomarker Lipoprotein(a) – Lp(a) in der Diagnostik der peripheren arteriellen Verschlusskrankheit

“…Die Sensitivität eines ABI-Wertes < 0,9 für das Vorliegen einer mindestens 50 %igen Gefäßstenose (verifiziert mit dem Goldstandard Angiographie) beträgt nahezu 95 % in Ruhe, die Spezifität fast 100 % [11,13,21,68]. Ein pathologischer ABI-Befund ist ein unabhängiger Indikator für die kardiovaskuläre Morbidität und Mortalität [10,13,18]. Die über die Jahre kontinuierlich zunehmende Gesamtprävalenz der PAVK in Deutschland beträgt 3-10 %, wobei diese ab einem Alter von 70 Jahren auf 15-20 % ansteigt [10-13, 21, 23, 30, 46].…”

Der Tumormarker Sialinsäure

“…Als weitere Risikofaktoren werden eine geringe Mundhygiene, Holzstaubexposition, Viren, Bestrahlung, familiäre und genetische Prädispositionen, Soor, Gebrauch von Mundwasser, Syphilis, Mangelernährung, der Konsum von rotem, verarbeitetem oder gesalzenem Fleisch und Mate beschrieben [7,14,17,[20][21][22][23]. Diskutiert werden außerdem Kuchen oder Desserts, Butter, Eier, Suppen, Käse, Pasta, Reis, Polenta, Hirse und Vollkornbrot [8].…”

“…Besonders bei Mundhöhlenkarzinomen und auch schon bei prämalignen Läsionen werden sowohl im Serum als auch im Speichel signifikant erhöhte Sia-linkonzentrationen im Vergleich zu gesunden Personen detektiert [8,17,30,46,51]. Hier können sie zur Diagnostik, zum Monitoring und zur prognostischen Abschätzung verwendet werden, wobei sich Speichel aufgrund der einfachen Gewinnung gut zum Screening eignet [8,13,14,20,28,32,51].…”

Imaging of asbestos-related lung and pleural diseases as an endemic exposure in Egypt

“…One main concern is the early and clear identification of lesions with a high risk of malignant changes and their undelayed clinical work-up. False positive results may lead to unnecessary and often painful diagnostic interventions, which create high costs when applied to a large cohort and also may discredit the whole program [5].…”