PURPOSE: Spontaneous regression of squamous cell carcinoma is a very rare event. We report a case of primary squamous cell carcinoma in the lacrimal sac which showed spontaneous regression without any treatment. CASE SUMMARY: A 69-year-old woman presented with epiphora and ocular discharge from the right eye. Under the diagnosis of nasolacrimal duct obstruction, we performed dacryocystorhinostomy. Two years after the surgery, the patient presented again with severe epiphora and ocular pain accompanied by proptosis and adduction limitation in the right eye. Computed tomography demonstrated a mass occupying the right lacrimal sac and incisional biopsy showed poorly differentiated invasive squamous cell carcinoma. Additional treatment was recommended, but the patient denied any treatments. At 6 months after the biopsy, the medial orbital wall was partially destructed. On positron emission tomography/computed tomography, metastasis was suspected in the cervical, para-aortic, sub-carinal, and peri-esophageal lymph nodes. However, at 15 months after the biopsy, the orbital tumor had almost disappeared. On positron emission tomography/computed tomography, fluorodeoxyglucose uptake was reduced in all areas including the cervical and mediastinal lymph nodes. CONCLUSIONS: This case exhibited a generally natural course of a malignant tumor, including medial orbital wall destruction and lymph node metastasis. However, the course then improved naturally without any treatment. The reason for the spontaneous regression of squamous cell carcinoma is still unclear but might be due to complex effects of one or several factors.
Aged ; Biopsy ; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell* ; Dacryocystorhinostomy ; Diagnosis ; Electrons ; Epithelial Cells* ; Exophthalmos ; Female ; Humans ; Lacrimal Apparatus ; Lacrimal Apparatus Diseases ; Lymph Nodes ; Nasolacrimal Duct* ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Neoplasm Regression, Spontaneous ; Orbit

PURPOSE: This study aims to examine and compare the features of rolandic epilepsy. METHODS: Of 158 patients selected retrospectively, 116 had typical (group A) and 42 had atypical (group B) rolandic epilepsy, as defined by Worrall's criteria. RESULTS: The age at onset of the seizures in group Awas 8.6+/-2.0 y and 6.2+/-1.7 y in group B (P>0.05). Among the 40 patients who underwent neuroimaging studies (25 patients in group Aand 15 patients in group B), abnormal findings in group B included ventricular dilatation, mild cortical atrophy, and partial agenesis of corpus callosum. group A had no abnormal findings. The frequency of seizures was 2.0+/-1.0 and 2.3+/-1.2 per month in groups A and B respectively. Seizure control from the initial anticonvulsant treatment was achieved within 3 months in group A, and 3 to 12 months in group B. A 2-year remission rate was noted in 105 patients in group A and in 38 patients in group B. Of these, the recurrence rate after 2 y was 13 in group A and 12 in group B. CONCLUSION: Age of onset of seizures, gender, frequency of seizures before therapy, and 2-y remission rate were not significantly different in the 2 groups. However, neuroimaging abnormalities, the time to achieving seizure control from the initial anticonvulsant treatment, and the recurrence rate after being seizure-free for 2 y were significantly different in the 2 groups.
Age of Onset ; Agenesis of Corpus Callosum ; Atrophy ; Dilatation ; Epilepsy, Rolandic ; Humans ; Neuroimaging ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies ; Seizures

Clinodactyly, as rare congenital malformation, refers to a curvature of a digit in a radial or ulnar direction in the coronal plane. The abnormality is inherited as an autosomal dominant trait. And its frequency was low, however, it was higher by accompanying other congenital anomaly. In present study, the frequency and genetic characteristics of clinodactyly were investigated. In 100 family (382 peoples), clinodactyly was found in 4.7% (n=18). All clinodactyly were bilateral and it was more frequent in female (6.8%) than male (2.6%), without statistical difference (p=0.056). Its inheritance was autosomal dominant trait in 80% (4/5) families, however, one family did not have any inheritance pattern. We described the frequency and clinical implication of clinodactyly, and this description will be lead to an improved understanding of its spectrum and inheritance.
Female ; Hand Deformities ; Humans ; Inheritance Patterns ; Male ; Prevalence* ; Wills

Objective: This study compared the effects of preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) versus resuscitation alone, angioembolization, PPP with pelvic stabilization, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) with PPP, pelvic stabilization, and REBOA. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature, and conference proceedings from inception until March 10, 2022. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of intervention (ROBINS-I) and ROB 2.0 tools were used to assess the risk of bias for non-randomized studies and randomized controlled trials, respectively. The certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. Results: Twenty-two studies, including 1,762 participants, were retrieved. Based on randomized controlled trials, there was a high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP versus angioembolization on improving the mortality rate (risk ratio [RR]=0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-2.49; very low certainty of evidence) and improving the hemorrhagic mortality rate (RR=0.19; 95% CI 0.01-3.72; very low certainty of evidence). Based on non-randomized studies, there was a high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP versus angioembolization on improving the mortality rate (RR=0.76; 95% CI 0.48-1.21; I2=54%; very low certainty of evidence), improving the hemorrhagic mortality rate (RR=0.66; 95% CI 0.18-2.46; I2=75%; very low certainty of evidence), and reducing the post procedural complications (RR=0.76; 95% CI 0.39-1.48; I2=66%; very low certainty of evidence). Conclusion There is high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP compared to resuscitation only, angioembolization, PPP with pelvic stabilization, REBOA following PPP, pelvic stabilization, and REBOA. (Registration No. CRD42022311628)

Objective: This study compared the effects of preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) versus resuscitation alone, angioembolization, PPP with pelvic stabilization, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) with PPP, pelvic stabilization, and REBOA. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature, and conference proceedings from inception until March 10, 2022. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of intervention (ROBINS-I) and ROB 2.0 tools were used to assess the risk of bias for non-randomized studies and randomized controlled trials, respectively. The certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. Results: Twenty-two studies, including 1,762 participants, were retrieved. Based on randomized controlled trials, there was a high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP versus angioembolization on improving the mortality rate (risk ratio [RR]=0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-2.49; very low certainty of evidence) and improving the hemorrhagic mortality rate (RR=0.19; 95% CI 0.01-3.72; very low certainty of evidence). Based on non-randomized studies, there was a high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP versus angioembolization on improving the mortality rate (RR=0.76; 95% CI 0.48-1.21; I2=54%; very low certainty of evidence), improving the hemorrhagic mortality rate (RR=0.66; 95% CI 0.18-2.46; I2=75%; very low certainty of evidence), and reducing the post procedural complications (RR=0.76; 95% CI 0.39-1.48; I2=66%; very low certainty of evidence). Conclusion There is high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP compared to resuscitation only, angioembolization, PPP with pelvic stabilization, REBOA following PPP, pelvic stabilization, and REBOA. (Registration No. CRD42022311628)

Objective: This study compared the effects of preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) versus resuscitation alone, angioembolization, PPP with pelvic stabilization, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) with PPP, pelvic stabilization, and REBOA. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature, and conference proceedings from inception until March 10, 2022. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of intervention (ROBINS-I) and ROB 2.0 tools were used to assess the risk of bias for non-randomized studies and randomized controlled trials, respectively. The certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. Results: Twenty-two studies, including 1,762 participants, were retrieved. Based on randomized controlled trials, there was a high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP versus angioembolization on improving the mortality rate (risk ratio [RR]=0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-2.49; very low certainty of evidence) and improving the hemorrhagic mortality rate (RR=0.19; 95% CI 0.01-3.72; very low certainty of evidence). Based on non-randomized studies, there was a high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP versus angioembolization on improving the mortality rate (RR=0.76; 95% CI 0.48-1.21; I2=54%; very low certainty of evidence), improving the hemorrhagic mortality rate (RR=0.66; 95% CI 0.18-2.46; I2=75%; very low certainty of evidence), and reducing the post procedural complications (RR=0.76; 95% CI 0.39-1.48; I2=66%; very low certainty of evidence). Conclusion There is high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP compared to resuscitation only, angioembolization, PPP with pelvic stabilization, REBOA following PPP, pelvic stabilization, and REBOA. (Registration No. CRD42022311628)

Objective: This study compared the effects of preperitoneal pelvic packing (PPP) versus resuscitation alone, angioembolization, PPP with pelvic stabilization, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) with PPP, pelvic stabilization, and REBOA. Methods: A comprehensive search was performed using multiple databases, trial registries, grey literature, and conference proceedings from inception until March 10, 2022. The risk of bias in non-randomized studies of intervention (ROBINS-I) and ROB 2.0 tools were used to assess the risk of bias for non-randomized studies and randomized controlled trials, respectively. The certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. Results: Twenty-two studies, including 1,762 participants, were retrieved. Based on randomized controlled trials, there was a high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP versus angioembolization on improving the mortality rate (risk ratio [RR]=0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-2.49; very low certainty of evidence) and improving the hemorrhagic mortality rate (RR=0.19; 95% CI 0.01-3.72; very low certainty of evidence). Based on non-randomized studies, there was a high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP versus angioembolization on improving the mortality rate (RR=0.76; 95% CI 0.48-1.21; I2=54%; very low certainty of evidence), improving the hemorrhagic mortality rate (RR=0.66; 95% CI 0.18-2.46; I2=75%; very low certainty of evidence), and reducing the post procedural complications (RR=0.76; 95% CI 0.39-1.48; I2=66%; very low certainty of evidence). Conclusion There is high uncertainty regarding the effects of PPP compared to resuscitation only, angioembolization, PPP with pelvic stabilization, REBOA following PPP, pelvic stabilization, and REBOA. (Registration No. CRD42022311628)