Article

Key clinical point: Pyrotinib+capecitabine showed intracranial objective response and was well tolerated in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (BC) and brain metastases in the PERMEATE phase 2 study.

Major finding: The intracranial objective response rate was 74.6% (95% CI 61.6%-85.0%) in radiotherapy-naive patients and 42.1% (95% CI 20.3%-66.5%) in patients with progressive disease after whole-brain radiotherapy. Common grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea and decreased white blood cell count. No treatment-related deaths were reported.

Study details: Findings are from the single-arm, phase 2 PERMEATE study including 78 patients with HER2+ BC and brain metastases who were either radiotherapy-naive or had progressive disease after radiotherapy. Patients received 400 mg pyrotinib once daily and 1000 mg/m² capecitabine twice daily for 14 days, followed by 7 days off during each 21-day cycle.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the National Cancer Centre Climbing Foundation Key Project of China and Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Yan M et al. Lancet Oncol. 2022 (Jan 24). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00716-6.

Key clinical point: Pyrotinib+capecitabine showed intracranial objective response and was well tolerated in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (BC) and brain metastases in the PERMEATE phase 2 study.

Major finding: The intracranial objective response rate was 74.6% (95% CI 61.6%-85.0%) in radiotherapy-naive patients and 42.1% (95% CI 20.3%-66.5%) in patients with progressive disease after whole-brain radiotherapy. Common grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea and decreased white blood cell count. No treatment-related deaths were reported.

Study details: Findings are from the single-arm, phase 2 PERMEATE study including 78 patients with HER2+ BC and brain metastases who were either radiotherapy-naive or had progressive disease after radiotherapy. Patients received 400 mg pyrotinib once daily and 1000 mg/m² capecitabine twice daily for 14 days, followed by 7 days off during each 21-day cycle.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the National Cancer Centre Climbing Foundation Key Project of China and Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Yan M et al. Lancet Oncol. 2022 (Jan 24). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00716-6.

Key clinical point: Pyrotinib+capecitabine showed intracranial objective response and was well tolerated in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (BC) and brain metastases in the PERMEATE phase 2 study.

Major finding: The intracranial objective response rate was 74.6% (95% CI 61.6%-85.0%) in radiotherapy-naive patients and 42.1% (95% CI 20.3%-66.5%) in patients with progressive disease after whole-brain radiotherapy. Common grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea and decreased white blood cell count. No treatment-related deaths were reported.

Study details: Findings are from the single-arm, phase 2 PERMEATE study including 78 patients with HER2+ BC and brain metastases who were either radiotherapy-naive or had progressive disease after radiotherapy. Patients received 400 mg pyrotinib once daily and 1000 mg/m² capecitabine twice daily for 14 days, followed by 7 days off during each 21-day cycle.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the National Cancer Centre Climbing Foundation Key Project of China and Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Yan M et al. Lancet Oncol. 2022 (Jan 24). Doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00716-6.

What is the most appropriate treatment for a pregnant woman who is moderately to severely ill with COVID-19 infection?

Continue to the answer...

Moderately to severely ill pregnant women with COVID-19 infection should be hospitalized and treated with supplementary oxygen, remdesivir, and dexamethasone. Other possible therapies include inhaled nitric oxide, baricitinib (a Janus kinase inhibitor), and tocilizumab (an anti-interleukin 6 receptor antibody). (RECOVERY Collaborative Group; Horby P, Lim WS, Emberson JR, et al. Dexamethasone in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:693-704. Kalil AC, Patterson TF, Mehta AK, et al; ACTT-2 Study Group. Baricitinib plus remdesivir for hospitalized adults with COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:795-807. Berlin DA, Gulick RM, Martinez FJ, et al. Severe COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;383;2451-2460.)

What is the most appropriate treatment for a pregnant woman who is moderately to severely ill with COVID-19 infection?

Continue to the answer...

Moderately to severely ill pregnant women with COVID-19 infection should be hospitalized and treated with supplementary oxygen, remdesivir, and dexamethasone. Other possible therapies include inhaled nitric oxide, baricitinib (a Janus kinase inhibitor), and tocilizumab (an anti-interleukin 6 receptor antibody). (RECOVERY Collaborative Group; Horby P, Lim WS, Emberson JR, et al. Dexamethasone in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:693-704. Kalil AC, Patterson TF, Mehta AK, et al; ACTT-2 Study Group. Baricitinib plus remdesivir for hospitalized adults with COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:795-807. Berlin DA, Gulick RM, Martinez FJ, et al. Severe COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;383;2451-2460.)

What is the most appropriate treatment for a pregnant woman who is moderately to severely ill with COVID-19 infection?

Continue to the answer...

Moderately to severely ill pregnant women with COVID-19 infection should be hospitalized and treated with supplementary oxygen, remdesivir, and dexamethasone. Other possible therapies include inhaled nitric oxide, baricitinib (a Janus kinase inhibitor), and tocilizumab (an anti-interleukin 6 receptor antibody). (RECOVERY Collaborative Group; Horby P, Lim WS, Emberson JR, et al. Dexamethasone in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:693-704. Kalil AC, Patterson TF, Mehta AK, et al; ACTT-2 Study Group. Baricitinib plus remdesivir for hospitalized adults with COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2021;384:795-807. Berlin DA, Gulick RM, Martinez FJ, et al. Severe COVID-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;383;2451-2460.)

The Diagnosis: Leishmaniasis

Hematoxylin and eosin staining of the tissue specimen revealed a dense histiocytic infiltrate with scattered lymphocytes and neutrophils. There were round to oval basophilic structures within the macrophages consistent with amastigotes. Giemsa staining was not necessary to visualize the organisms. The infiltrate abutted the overlying epidermis, which was acanthotic with pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia. There were collections of neutrophils, parakeratosis, and a serum crust overlying the epidermis (Figure). Clinical and histologic findings, as well as travel history, led to a diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL).

Leishmaniases is a group of diseases caused by a parasitic infection with flagellated protozoa of the genus Leishmania. There are more than 20 different Leishmania species that are pathogenic to humans, all presenting with cutaneous findings. The presentation depends on the inoculating species and the host cellular immune response and includes cutaneous, mucosal, and visceral involvement. The disease is transmitted via the bite of an infected bloodsucking female sand fly.¹ There are approximately 30 different species of sand flies that are proven to be vectors of the disease, with up to 40 more suspected of involvement in transmission, predominantly from the genera Phlebotomus (Old World) and Lutzomyia (New World).^1,2 There are an estimated 1 to 2 million new cases of cutaneous leishmaniasis diagnosed annually in 70 endemic countries of the tropics, subtropics, and southern Europe.^1,3,4

The differential diagnosis included cutaneous tuberculosis, which can have a similar progression and clinical appearance. Cutaneous tuberculosis starts as firm, reddish-brown, painless papules that slowly enlarge and ulcerate.⁵ It may be further differentiated on histopathology by the presence of tuberculoid granulomas, caseating necrosis, and acid-fast bacilli, which are easily detected in early lesions but are less prevalent after the granuloma develops.⁶ Sporotrichosis presents as a nodule, which may or may not ulcerate, on the extremities. However, the classic morphology is a sporotrichoid pattern, which describes the initial lesion plus subcutaneous nodular spread along the lymphatics.⁷ On histology, sporotrichosis has a characteristic “sporotrichoid asteroid” comprised of the yeast form surrounded by eosinophilic hyaline material in raylike processes that are found in the center of suppurative granulomas or foci.⁸

Atypical mycobacteria, principally Mycobacterium marinum (swimming pool granuloma) and Mycobacterium ulcerans (Buruli ulcer), are capable of causing cutaneous infections. They may be differentiated histologically by a neutrophilic infiltrate of poorly formed granulomas without caseation and extensive coagulative necrosis with little cellular infiltrate, respectively.⁶ Histoplasma capsulatum also infects histiocytes and may appear similar in size and shape; however, histoplasmosis is surrounded by a pseudocapsule and evenly spaced.⁸

Conversely, the histology of leishmaniasis lacks a pseudocapsule. The amastigotes may form the classic marquee sign by lining the periphery of the macrophage or they can be randomly spaced. Classically, the epidermis shows hyperkeratosis and acanthosis. Sometimes atrophy, ulceration, or intraepidermal abscesses also can be observed. Pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia can be seen in some long-standing lesions.^1,4 Many of these findings were observed on hematoxylin and eosin staining from a punch biopsy obtained from the center of the lesion in our patient. For further delineation, a speciation kit was obtained from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (Bethesda, Maryland). A second punch biopsy was obtained from the lesion edge, sectioned into 4 individual pieces, and placed in Schneider tissue culture medium. It was sent for tissue culture, polymerase chain reaction, and histology. Polymerase chain reaction analysis was positive for Leishmania, which was further identified as Leishmania tropica by tissue culture.

Leishmania tropica (Old World CL) commonly causes CL and is endemic to Central Asia, the Middle East, parts of North Africa, and Southeast Asia. Old and New World CL start as a small erythematous papule after a bite from an infected female sand fly. The papule develops into a nodule over weeks to months. The lesion may ulcerate and typically heals leaving an atrophic scar in months to years.¹ Speciation of CL is important to guide therapy.

Leishmania mexicana, a New World species that commonly causes CL, classically is found in Central and South America, but there also have been documented cases in Texas. A 2008 case series identified 9 cases in northern Texas in residents without a travel history to endemic locations.⁹ Similarly, a cross-sectional study identified 41 locally endemic cases of CL over a 10-year period (2007-2017) in Texas; 22 of these cases had speciation by polymerase chain reaction, and all cases were attributed to L mexicana.¹⁰

In the United States, CL classically has been associated with travelers and military personnel returning from the Middle East; however, a growing body of literature suggests that it may be endemic to Texas, where it is now a reportable disease. Physicians should have an increased awareness of this entity and a high index of suspicion when treating patients with nonhealing cutaneous lesions.

The Diagnosis: Leishmaniasis

Hematoxylin and eosin staining of the tissue specimen revealed a dense histiocytic infiltrate with scattered lymphocytes and neutrophils. There were round to oval basophilic structures within the macrophages consistent with amastigotes. Giemsa staining was not necessary to visualize the organisms. The infiltrate abutted the overlying epidermis, which was acanthotic with pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia. There were collections of neutrophils, parakeratosis, and a serum crust overlying the epidermis (Figure). Clinical and histologic findings, as well as travel history, led to a diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL).

Leishmaniases is a group of diseases caused by a parasitic infection with flagellated protozoa of the genus Leishmania. There are more than 20 different Leishmania species that are pathogenic to humans, all presenting with cutaneous findings. The presentation depends on the inoculating species and the host cellular immune response and includes cutaneous, mucosal, and visceral involvement. The disease is transmitted via the bite of an infected bloodsucking female sand fly.¹ There are approximately 30 different species of sand flies that are proven to be vectors of the disease, with up to 40 more suspected of involvement in transmission, predominantly from the genera Phlebotomus (Old World) and Lutzomyia (New World).^1,2 There are an estimated 1 to 2 million new cases of cutaneous leishmaniasis diagnosed annually in 70 endemic countries of the tropics, subtropics, and southern Europe.^1,3,4

The differential diagnosis included cutaneous tuberculosis, which can have a similar progression and clinical appearance. Cutaneous tuberculosis starts as firm, reddish-brown, painless papules that slowly enlarge and ulcerate.⁵ It may be further differentiated on histopathology by the presence of tuberculoid granulomas, caseating necrosis, and acid-fast bacilli, which are easily detected in early lesions but are less prevalent after the granuloma develops.⁶ Sporotrichosis presents as a nodule, which may or may not ulcerate, on the extremities. However, the classic morphology is a sporotrichoid pattern, which describes the initial lesion plus subcutaneous nodular spread along the lymphatics.⁷ On histology, sporotrichosis has a characteristic “sporotrichoid asteroid” comprised of the yeast form surrounded by eosinophilic hyaline material in raylike processes that are found in the center of suppurative granulomas or foci.⁸

Atypical mycobacteria, principally Mycobacterium marinum (swimming pool granuloma) and Mycobacterium ulcerans (Buruli ulcer), are capable of causing cutaneous infections. They may be differentiated histologically by a neutrophilic infiltrate of poorly formed granulomas without caseation and extensive coagulative necrosis with little cellular infiltrate, respectively.⁶ Histoplasma capsulatum also infects histiocytes and may appear similar in size and shape; however, histoplasmosis is surrounded by a pseudocapsule and evenly spaced.⁸

Conversely, the histology of leishmaniasis lacks a pseudocapsule. The amastigotes may form the classic marquee sign by lining the periphery of the macrophage or they can be randomly spaced. Classically, the epidermis shows hyperkeratosis and acanthosis. Sometimes atrophy, ulceration, or intraepidermal abscesses also can be observed. Pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia can be seen in some long-standing lesions.^1,4 Many of these findings were observed on hematoxylin and eosin staining from a punch biopsy obtained from the center of the lesion in our patient. For further delineation, a speciation kit was obtained from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (Bethesda, Maryland). A second punch biopsy was obtained from the lesion edge, sectioned into 4 individual pieces, and placed in Schneider tissue culture medium. It was sent for tissue culture, polymerase chain reaction, and histology. Polymerase chain reaction analysis was positive for Leishmania, which was further identified as Leishmania tropica by tissue culture.

Leishmania tropica (Old World CL) commonly causes CL and is endemic to Central Asia, the Middle East, parts of North Africa, and Southeast Asia. Old and New World CL start as a small erythematous papule after a bite from an infected female sand fly. The papule develops into a nodule over weeks to months. The lesion may ulcerate and typically heals leaving an atrophic scar in months to years.¹ Speciation of CL is important to guide therapy.

Leishmania mexicana, a New World species that commonly causes CL, classically is found in Central and South America, but there also have been documented cases in Texas. A 2008 case series identified 9 cases in northern Texas in residents without a travel history to endemic locations.⁹ Similarly, a cross-sectional study identified 41 locally endemic cases of CL over a 10-year period (2007-2017) in Texas; 22 of these cases had speciation by polymerase chain reaction, and all cases were attributed to L mexicana.¹⁰

In the United States, CL classically has been associated with travelers and military personnel returning from the Middle East; however, a growing body of literature suggests that it may be endemic to Texas, where it is now a reportable disease. Physicians should have an increased awareness of this entity and a high index of suspicion when treating patients with nonhealing cutaneous lesions.

The Diagnosis: Leishmaniasis

Hematoxylin and eosin staining of the tissue specimen revealed a dense histiocytic infiltrate with scattered lymphocytes and neutrophils. There were round to oval basophilic structures within the macrophages consistent with amastigotes. Giemsa staining was not necessary to visualize the organisms. The infiltrate abutted the overlying epidermis, which was acanthotic with pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia. There were collections of neutrophils, parakeratosis, and a serum crust overlying the epidermis (Figure). Clinical and histologic findings, as well as travel history, led to a diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL).

Leishmaniases is a group of diseases caused by a parasitic infection with flagellated protozoa of the genus Leishmania. There are more than 20 different Leishmania species that are pathogenic to humans, all presenting with cutaneous findings. The presentation depends on the inoculating species and the host cellular immune response and includes cutaneous, mucosal, and visceral involvement. The disease is transmitted via the bite of an infected bloodsucking female sand fly.¹ There are approximately 30 different species of sand flies that are proven to be vectors of the disease, with up to 40 more suspected of involvement in transmission, predominantly from the genera Phlebotomus (Old World) and Lutzomyia (New World).^1,2 There are an estimated 1 to 2 million new cases of cutaneous leishmaniasis diagnosed annually in 70 endemic countries of the tropics, subtropics, and southern Europe.^1,3,4

The differential diagnosis included cutaneous tuberculosis, which can have a similar progression and clinical appearance. Cutaneous tuberculosis starts as firm, reddish-brown, painless papules that slowly enlarge and ulcerate.⁵ It may be further differentiated on histopathology by the presence of tuberculoid granulomas, caseating necrosis, and acid-fast bacilli, which are easily detected in early lesions but are less prevalent after the granuloma develops.⁶ Sporotrichosis presents as a nodule, which may or may not ulcerate, on the extremities. However, the classic morphology is a sporotrichoid pattern, which describes the initial lesion plus subcutaneous nodular spread along the lymphatics.⁷ On histology, sporotrichosis has a characteristic “sporotrichoid asteroid” comprised of the yeast form surrounded by eosinophilic hyaline material in raylike processes that are found in the center of suppurative granulomas or foci.⁸

Atypical mycobacteria, principally Mycobacterium marinum (swimming pool granuloma) and Mycobacterium ulcerans (Buruli ulcer), are capable of causing cutaneous infections. They may be differentiated histologically by a neutrophilic infiltrate of poorly formed granulomas without caseation and extensive coagulative necrosis with little cellular infiltrate, respectively.⁶ Histoplasma capsulatum also infects histiocytes and may appear similar in size and shape; however, histoplasmosis is surrounded by a pseudocapsule and evenly spaced.⁸

Conversely, the histology of leishmaniasis lacks a pseudocapsule. The amastigotes may form the classic marquee sign by lining the periphery of the macrophage or they can be randomly spaced. Classically, the epidermis shows hyperkeratosis and acanthosis. Sometimes atrophy, ulceration, or intraepidermal abscesses also can be observed. Pseudoepitheliomatous hyperplasia can be seen in some long-standing lesions.^1,4 Many of these findings were observed on hematoxylin and eosin staining from a punch biopsy obtained from the center of the lesion in our patient. For further delineation, a speciation kit was obtained from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center (Bethesda, Maryland). A second punch biopsy was obtained from the lesion edge, sectioned into 4 individual pieces, and placed in Schneider tissue culture medium. It was sent for tissue culture, polymerase chain reaction, and histology. Polymerase chain reaction analysis was positive for Leishmania, which was further identified as Leishmania tropica by tissue culture.

Leishmania tropica (Old World CL) commonly causes CL and is endemic to Central Asia, the Middle East, parts of North Africa, and Southeast Asia. Old and New World CL start as a small erythematous papule after a bite from an infected female sand fly. The papule develops into a nodule over weeks to months. The lesion may ulcerate and typically heals leaving an atrophic scar in months to years.¹ Speciation of CL is important to guide therapy.

Leishmania mexicana, a New World species that commonly causes CL, classically is found in Central and South America, but there also have been documented cases in Texas. A 2008 case series identified 9 cases in northern Texas in residents without a travel history to endemic locations.⁹ Similarly, a cross-sectional study identified 41 locally endemic cases of CL over a 10-year period (2007-2017) in Texas; 22 of these cases had speciation by polymerase chain reaction, and all cases were attributed to L mexicana.¹⁰

In the United States, CL classically has been associated with travelers and military personnel returning from the Middle East; however, a growing body of literature suggests that it may be endemic to Texas, where it is now a reportable disease. Physicians should have an increased awareness of this entity and a high index of suspicion when treating patients with nonhealing cutaneous lesions.

Common skin reactions to treatment with topical 5-FU for actinic keratosis include erythema, ulceration, and burning. In this case, however, the skin disruption opened the door to secondary impetigo.

Secondary skin infections are a known risk of treatment with topical 5-FU. The agent inhibits thymidylate synthetase, an enzyme involved in the synthesis and repair of DNA. The inhibition of this enzyme can lead to skin disruption with erosion, desquamation, and the risk of superimposed skin infections, as was seen with this patient.¹

Impetigo is a common skin infection affecting the superficial layers of the epidermis and is most commonly caused by gram-positive bacteria, such as Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes.² Secondary impetigo, also known as impetiginization, is an infection of previously disrupted skin due to eczema, trauma, insect bites, and other conditions. This contrasts with primary impetigo, which results from a direct bacterial invasion of intact healthy skin. While impetigo predominantly affects children between the ages of 2 and 5 years, people of any age can be affected.² Impetigo characteristically manifests with painful erosions, classically covered by honey-colored crusts. Thin-walled vesicles often appear and subsequently rupture.

Treatment options for impetigo include both topical and systemic antibiotics. Topical therapy is preferred for patients with limited skin involvement, while systemic therapy is indicated for patients with numerous lesions. Mupirocin and retapamulin are first-line topical treatments. Systemic antibiotic therapy should provide coverage for both S. aureus and streptococcal infections; cephalexin and dicloxacillin are preferred. Doxycycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, or clindamycin can be used if methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is suspected.³

This patient was advised to try warm soaks (to reduce the crusting) and to follow that with the application of white petrolatum bid. The patient was also prescribed doxycycline 100 mg orally bid for 10 days. At the 1-month follow-up, there was some residual erythema, but the impetigo and crusting had resolved. The actinic keratoses had resolved, as well.

‌

Image courtesy of Daniel Stulberg, MD. Text courtesy of Tess Pei Lemon, BA, University of New Mexico School of Medicine and Daniel Stulberg, MD, FAAFP, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque

Common skin reactions to treatment with topical 5-FU for actinic keratosis include erythema, ulceration, and burning. In this case, however, the skin disruption opened the door to secondary impetigo.

Secondary skin infections are a known risk of treatment with topical 5-FU. The agent inhibits thymidylate synthetase, an enzyme involved in the synthesis and repair of DNA. The inhibition of this enzyme can lead to skin disruption with erosion, desquamation, and the risk of superimposed skin infections, as was seen with this patient.¹

Impetigo is a common skin infection affecting the superficial layers of the epidermis and is most commonly caused by gram-positive bacteria, such as Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes.² Secondary impetigo, also known as impetiginization, is an infection of previously disrupted skin due to eczema, trauma, insect bites, and other conditions. This contrasts with primary impetigo, which results from a direct bacterial invasion of intact healthy skin. While impetigo predominantly affects children between the ages of 2 and 5 years, people of any age can be affected.² Impetigo characteristically manifests with painful erosions, classically covered by honey-colored crusts. Thin-walled vesicles often appear and subsequently rupture.

Treatment options for impetigo include both topical and systemic antibiotics. Topical therapy is preferred for patients with limited skin involvement, while systemic therapy is indicated for patients with numerous lesions. Mupirocin and retapamulin are first-line topical treatments. Systemic antibiotic therapy should provide coverage for both S. aureus and streptococcal infections; cephalexin and dicloxacillin are preferred. Doxycycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, or clindamycin can be used if methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is suspected.³

This patient was advised to try warm soaks (to reduce the crusting) and to follow that with the application of white petrolatum bid. The patient was also prescribed doxycycline 100 mg orally bid for 10 days. At the 1-month follow-up, there was some residual erythema, but the impetigo and crusting had resolved. The actinic keratoses had resolved, as well.

‌

Image courtesy of Daniel Stulberg, MD. Text courtesy of Tess Pei Lemon, BA, University of New Mexico School of Medicine and Daniel Stulberg, MD, FAAFP, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque

Common skin reactions to treatment with topical 5-FU for actinic keratosis include erythema, ulceration, and burning. In this case, however, the skin disruption opened the door to secondary impetigo.

Secondary skin infections are a known risk of treatment with topical 5-FU. The agent inhibits thymidylate synthetase, an enzyme involved in the synthesis and repair of DNA. The inhibition of this enzyme can lead to skin disruption with erosion, desquamation, and the risk of superimposed skin infections, as was seen with this patient.¹

Impetigo is a common skin infection affecting the superficial layers of the epidermis and is most commonly caused by gram-positive bacteria, such as Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes.² Secondary impetigo, also known as impetiginization, is an infection of previously disrupted skin due to eczema, trauma, insect bites, and other conditions. This contrasts with primary impetigo, which results from a direct bacterial invasion of intact healthy skin. While impetigo predominantly affects children between the ages of 2 and 5 years, people of any age can be affected.² Impetigo characteristically manifests with painful erosions, classically covered by honey-colored crusts. Thin-walled vesicles often appear and subsequently rupture.

Treatment options for impetigo include both topical and systemic antibiotics. Topical therapy is preferred for patients with limited skin involvement, while systemic therapy is indicated for patients with numerous lesions. Mupirocin and retapamulin are first-line topical treatments. Systemic antibiotic therapy should provide coverage for both S. aureus and streptococcal infections; cephalexin and dicloxacillin are preferred. Doxycycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, or clindamycin can be used if methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is suspected.³

This patient was advised to try warm soaks (to reduce the crusting) and to follow that with the application of white petrolatum bid. The patient was also prescribed doxycycline 100 mg orally bid for 10 days. At the 1-month follow-up, there was some residual erythema, but the impetigo and crusting had resolved. The actinic keratoses had resolved, as well.

‌

Image courtesy of Daniel Stulberg, MD. Text courtesy of Tess Pei Lemon, BA, University of New Mexico School of Medicine and Daniel Stulberg, MD, FAAFP, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque

The patient's clinical presentation and laboratory findings are consistent with a diagnosis of T2D.

The prevalence of T2D is increasing dramatically in children and adolescents. Like adult-onset T2D, obesity, family history, and sedentary lifestyle are major predisposing risk factors for T2D in children and adolescents. Significantly, the onset of diabetes at a younger age is associated with longer disease exposure and increased risk for chronic complications. Moreover, T2D in adolescents manifests as a severe progressive phenotype that often presents with complications, poor treatment response, and rapid progression of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Studies have shown that the risk for complications is greater in youth-onset T2D than it is in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and adult-onset T2D. 

T2D has a variable presentation in children and adolescents. Approximately one third of patients are diagnosed without having typical diabetes signs or symptoms. In most cases, these patients are in their mid-adolescence are obese and were screened because of one or more positive risk factors or because glycosuria was detected on a random urine test. These patients typically have one or more of the typical characteristics of metabolic syndrome, such as hypertension and dyslipidemia. 

Polyuria and polydipsia are seen in approximately 67% of youth with T2D at presentation. Recent weight loss may be present, but it is usually less severe in patients with T2D compared with T1D. Additionally, frequent fungal skin infections or severe vulvovaginitis because of Candida in adolescent girls can be the presenting complaint.

Diabetic ketoacidosis is present in less than 1 in 10 adolescents diagnosed with T2D. Most of these patients belong to ethnic minority groups, report polyuria, polydipsia, fatigue, and lethargy, and require hospital admission, rehydration, and insulin replacement therapy. Patients with symptoms such as vomiting can decline rapidly and need urgent evaluation and management. 

Certain adolescent patients with obesity who present with diabetic ketoacidosis and are diagnosed with T2D at presentation can also have T1D and will require lifelong insulin treatment. Therefore, following a diagnosis of diabetes in an adolescent, it is critical to differentiate T2D from type 1 diabetes, as well as from other more rare diabetes types, to ensure proper long-term management. Given the substantial overlap between T2D and T1D symptoms, a combination of history clues, clinical characteristics, and laboratory studies must be used to reliably make the distinction. Important clues in the patient's history include:

•    Age. Patients with T2D typically present after the onset of puberty, at a mean age of 13.5 years. Conversely, nearly one half of patients with T1D present before 10 years of age, regardless of race or ethnicity. 
•    Family history. Up to 90% of patients with T2D have an affected first- or second-degree relative; the corresponding percentage for patients with T1D is less than 10%.
•    Ethnicity. T2D disproportionately affects youth of ethnic and racial minorities. Compared with White individuals, youth belonging to minority groups such as Native American, African American, Hispanic, and Pacific Islander have a much higher risk of developing T2D.
•    Body weight. Most adolescents with T2D have obesity (BMI ≥ 95 percentile for age and sex), whereas those with T1D are usually of normal weight and may report a recent history of weight loss.
•    Clinical findings. Adolescents with T2D usually present with features of insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome, such as acanthosis nigricans, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and polycystic ovary syndrome, whereas these findings are rare in youth with T1D. One study showed that up to 90% of youth diagnosed with T2D had acanthosis nigricans, in contrast to only 12% of those diagnosed with T1D. 

Additionally, when the diagnosis of T2D is being considered in children and adolescents, a panel of pancreatic autoantibodies should be tested to exclude the possibility of autoimmune T1D. Because T2D is not immunologically mediated, the identification of one or more pancreatic (islet) cell antibodies in a diabetic adolescent with obesity supports the diagnosis of autoimmune diabetes. Antibodies that are usually measured include islet cell antibodies (against cytoplasmic proteins in the beta cell), anti-glutamic acid decarboxylase, and tyrosine phosphatase insulinoma-associated antigen 2, as well as anti-insulin antibodies if insulin replacement therapy has not been used for more than 2 weeks. In addition, a beta cell–specific autoantibody to zinc transporter 8 is frequently detected in children with T1D and can aid in the differential diagnosis. However, up to one third of children with T2D can have at least one detectable beta-cell autoantibody; therefore, total absence of diabetes autoimmune markers is not required for the diagnosis of T2D in children and adolescents.

When a diagnosis of T2D has been established, treatment should consist of lifestyle management, diabetes self-management education, and pharmacologic therapy. According to the 2022 American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care, the management of diabetes in children and adolescents cannot simply be drawn from the typical care provided to adults with diabetes. The epidemiology, pathophysiology, developmental considerations, and response to therapy in pediatric populations often vary from adult diabetes, and differences exist in recommended care for children and adolescents with T1D, T2D, and other forms of pediatric diabetes. 

Because the diabetes type is often uncertain in the first few weeks of treatment, initial therapy should address the hyperglycemia and associated metabolic derangements regardless of the ultimate diabetes type; therapy should then be adjusted once metabolic compensation has been established and subsequent information, such as islet autoantibody results, becomes available.

Romesh K. Khardori, MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Diabetes, Endocrine, and Metabolic Disorders, Eastern Virginia Medical School; EVMS Medical Group, Norfolk, Virginia

Romesh K. Khardori, MD, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships

The patient's clinical presentation and laboratory findings are consistent with a diagnosis of T2D.

The prevalence of T2D is increasing dramatically in children and adolescents. Like adult-onset T2D, obesity, family history, and sedentary lifestyle are major predisposing risk factors for T2D in children and adolescents. Significantly, the onset of diabetes at a younger age is associated with longer disease exposure and increased risk for chronic complications. Moreover, T2D in adolescents manifests as a severe progressive phenotype that often presents with complications, poor treatment response, and rapid progression of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Studies have shown that the risk for complications is greater in youth-onset T2D than it is in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and adult-onset T2D. 

T2D has a variable presentation in children and adolescents. Approximately one third of patients are diagnosed without having typical diabetes signs or symptoms. In most cases, these patients are in their mid-adolescence are obese and were screened because of one or more positive risk factors or because glycosuria was detected on a random urine test. These patients typically have one or more of the typical characteristics of metabolic syndrome, such as hypertension and dyslipidemia. 

Polyuria and polydipsia are seen in approximately 67% of youth with T2D at presentation. Recent weight loss may be present, but it is usually less severe in patients with T2D compared with T1D. Additionally, frequent fungal skin infections or severe vulvovaginitis because of Candida in adolescent girls can be the presenting complaint.

Diabetic ketoacidosis is present in less than 1 in 10 adolescents diagnosed with T2D. Most of these patients belong to ethnic minority groups, report polyuria, polydipsia, fatigue, and lethargy, and require hospital admission, rehydration, and insulin replacement therapy. Patients with symptoms such as vomiting can decline rapidly and need urgent evaluation and management. 

Certain adolescent patients with obesity who present with diabetic ketoacidosis and are diagnosed with T2D at presentation can also have T1D and will require lifelong insulin treatment. Therefore, following a diagnosis of diabetes in an adolescent, it is critical to differentiate T2D from type 1 diabetes, as well as from other more rare diabetes types, to ensure proper long-term management. Given the substantial overlap between T2D and T1D symptoms, a combination of history clues, clinical characteristics, and laboratory studies must be used to reliably make the distinction. Important clues in the patient's history include:

•    Age. Patients with T2D typically present after the onset of puberty, at a mean age of 13.5 years. Conversely, nearly one half of patients with T1D present before 10 years of age, regardless of race or ethnicity. 
•    Family history. Up to 90% of patients with T2D have an affected first- or second-degree relative; the corresponding percentage for patients with T1D is less than 10%.
•    Ethnicity. T2D disproportionately affects youth of ethnic and racial minorities. Compared with White individuals, youth belonging to minority groups such as Native American, African American, Hispanic, and Pacific Islander have a much higher risk of developing T2D.
•    Body weight. Most adolescents with T2D have obesity (BMI ≥ 95 percentile for age and sex), whereas those with T1D are usually of normal weight and may report a recent history of weight loss.
•    Clinical findings. Adolescents with T2D usually present with features of insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome, such as acanthosis nigricans, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and polycystic ovary syndrome, whereas these findings are rare in youth with T1D. One study showed that up to 90% of youth diagnosed with T2D had acanthosis nigricans, in contrast to only 12% of those diagnosed with T1D. 

Additionally, when the diagnosis of T2D is being considered in children and adolescents, a panel of pancreatic autoantibodies should be tested to exclude the possibility of autoimmune T1D. Because T2D is not immunologically mediated, the identification of one or more pancreatic (islet) cell antibodies in a diabetic adolescent with obesity supports the diagnosis of autoimmune diabetes. Antibodies that are usually measured include islet cell antibodies (against cytoplasmic proteins in the beta cell), anti-glutamic acid decarboxylase, and tyrosine phosphatase insulinoma-associated antigen 2, as well as anti-insulin antibodies if insulin replacement therapy has not been used for more than 2 weeks. In addition, a beta cell–specific autoantibody to zinc transporter 8 is frequently detected in children with T1D and can aid in the differential diagnosis. However, up to one third of children with T2D can have at least one detectable beta-cell autoantibody; therefore, total absence of diabetes autoimmune markers is not required for the diagnosis of T2D in children and adolescents.

When a diagnosis of T2D has been established, treatment should consist of lifestyle management, diabetes self-management education, and pharmacologic therapy. According to the 2022 American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care, the management of diabetes in children and adolescents cannot simply be drawn from the typical care provided to adults with diabetes. The epidemiology, pathophysiology, developmental considerations, and response to therapy in pediatric populations often vary from adult diabetes, and differences exist in recommended care for children and adolescents with T1D, T2D, and other forms of pediatric diabetes. 

Because the diabetes type is often uncertain in the first few weeks of treatment, initial therapy should address the hyperglycemia and associated metabolic derangements regardless of the ultimate diabetes type; therapy should then be adjusted once metabolic compensation has been established and subsequent information, such as islet autoantibody results, becomes available.

Romesh K. Khardori, MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Diabetes, Endocrine, and Metabolic Disorders, Eastern Virginia Medical School; EVMS Medical Group, Norfolk, Virginia

Romesh K. Khardori, MD, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships

The patient's clinical presentation and laboratory findings are consistent with a diagnosis of T2D.

The prevalence of T2D is increasing dramatically in children and adolescents. Like adult-onset T2D, obesity, family history, and sedentary lifestyle are major predisposing risk factors for T2D in children and adolescents. Significantly, the onset of diabetes at a younger age is associated with longer disease exposure and increased risk for chronic complications. Moreover, T2D in adolescents manifests as a severe progressive phenotype that often presents with complications, poor treatment response, and rapid progression of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Studies have shown that the risk for complications is greater in youth-onset T2D than it is in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and adult-onset T2D. 

T2D has a variable presentation in children and adolescents. Approximately one third of patients are diagnosed without having typical diabetes signs or symptoms. In most cases, these patients are in their mid-adolescence are obese and were screened because of one or more positive risk factors or because glycosuria was detected on a random urine test. These patients typically have one or more of the typical characteristics of metabolic syndrome, such as hypertension and dyslipidemia. 

Polyuria and polydipsia are seen in approximately 67% of youth with T2D at presentation. Recent weight loss may be present, but it is usually less severe in patients with T2D compared with T1D. Additionally, frequent fungal skin infections or severe vulvovaginitis because of Candida in adolescent girls can be the presenting complaint.

Diabetic ketoacidosis is present in less than 1 in 10 adolescents diagnosed with T2D. Most of these patients belong to ethnic minority groups, report polyuria, polydipsia, fatigue, and lethargy, and require hospital admission, rehydration, and insulin replacement therapy. Patients with symptoms such as vomiting can decline rapidly and need urgent evaluation and management. 

Certain adolescent patients with obesity who present with diabetic ketoacidosis and are diagnosed with T2D at presentation can also have T1D and will require lifelong insulin treatment. Therefore, following a diagnosis of diabetes in an adolescent, it is critical to differentiate T2D from type 1 diabetes, as well as from other more rare diabetes types, to ensure proper long-term management. Given the substantial overlap between T2D and T1D symptoms, a combination of history clues, clinical characteristics, and laboratory studies must be used to reliably make the distinction. Important clues in the patient's history include:

•    Age. Patients with T2D typically present after the onset of puberty, at a mean age of 13.5 years. Conversely, nearly one half of patients with T1D present before 10 years of age, regardless of race or ethnicity. 
•    Family history. Up to 90% of patients with T2D have an affected first- or second-degree relative; the corresponding percentage for patients with T1D is less than 10%.
•    Ethnicity. T2D disproportionately affects youth of ethnic and racial minorities. Compared with White individuals, youth belonging to minority groups such as Native American, African American, Hispanic, and Pacific Islander have a much higher risk of developing T2D.
•    Body weight. Most adolescents with T2D have obesity (BMI ≥ 95 percentile for age and sex), whereas those with T1D are usually of normal weight and may report a recent history of weight loss.
•    Clinical findings. Adolescents with T2D usually present with features of insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome, such as acanthosis nigricans, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and polycystic ovary syndrome, whereas these findings are rare in youth with T1D. One study showed that up to 90% of youth diagnosed with T2D had acanthosis nigricans, in contrast to only 12% of those diagnosed with T1D. 

Additionally, when the diagnosis of T2D is being considered in children and adolescents, a panel of pancreatic autoantibodies should be tested to exclude the possibility of autoimmune T1D. Because T2D is not immunologically mediated, the identification of one or more pancreatic (islet) cell antibodies in a diabetic adolescent with obesity supports the diagnosis of autoimmune diabetes. Antibodies that are usually measured include islet cell antibodies (against cytoplasmic proteins in the beta cell), anti-glutamic acid decarboxylase, and tyrosine phosphatase insulinoma-associated antigen 2, as well as anti-insulin antibodies if insulin replacement therapy has not been used for more than 2 weeks. In addition, a beta cell–specific autoantibody to zinc transporter 8 is frequently detected in children with T1D and can aid in the differential diagnosis. However, up to one third of children with T2D can have at least one detectable beta-cell autoantibody; therefore, total absence of diabetes autoimmune markers is not required for the diagnosis of T2D in children and adolescents.

When a diagnosis of T2D has been established, treatment should consist of lifestyle management, diabetes self-management education, and pharmacologic therapy. According to the 2022 American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care, the management of diabetes in children and adolescents cannot simply be drawn from the typical care provided to adults with diabetes. The epidemiology, pathophysiology, developmental considerations, and response to therapy in pediatric populations often vary from adult diabetes, and differences exist in recommended care for children and adolescents with T1D, T2D, and other forms of pediatric diabetes. 

Because the diabetes type is often uncertain in the first few weeks of treatment, initial therapy should address the hyperglycemia and associated metabolic derangements regardless of the ultimate diabetes type; therapy should then be adjusted once metabolic compensation has been established and subsequent information, such as islet autoantibody results, becomes available.

Romesh K. Khardori, MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Diabetes, Endocrine, and Metabolic Disorders, Eastern Virginia Medical School; EVMS Medical Group, Norfolk, Virginia

Romesh K. Khardori, MD, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships

Tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy (T&A) is the second most common pediatric surgical procedure in the United States.¹ It is most often performed during childhood between 5 and 8 years of age with a second peak observed between 17 and 21 years of age in the adolescent and young adult populations.² While recurrent tonsillitis has been traditionally associated with tonsillectomy, sleep disordered breathing with obstructive sleep apnea is now the primary indication for the procedure.¹

Up to 97% of T&As are performed as an outpatient same-day surgery not requiring inpatient admission.² Although largely a safe and routinely performed surgery, several complications have been described. Due to the outpatient nature of the procedure, the complications are often encountered in the emergency department (ED) and sometimes in primary care settings. Common complications (outside of the perioperative time frame) include nausea, vomiting, otalgia, odynophagia, infection of the throat (broadly), and hemorrhage; uncommon complications include subcutaneous emphysema, taste disorders, and Eagle syndrome. Some complications are rarer still and carry significant morbidity and even mortality, including mediastinitis, cervical osteomyelitis, and Grisel syndrome.³ The following case encourages the clinician to expand the differential for a patient presenting after T&A.

Case Presentation

A child aged < 3 years was brought to the ED by their mother. She reported neck pain and stiffness 10 days after T&A with concurrent tympanostomy tube placement at an outside pediatric hospital. At triage, their heart rate was 94 bpm, temperature was 98.2 °F, respiratory rate, 22 breaths per minute, and oxygen saturation, 97% on room air. The mother of the patient (MOP) had been giving the prescribed oral liquid formulations of ibuprofen and acetaminophen with hydrocodone as directed. No drug allergies were reported, and immunizations were up to date for age. Other medical and surgical history included eczema and remote cutaneous hemangioma resection. The patient lived at home with 2 parents and was not exposed to smoke; their family history was noncontributory.

Since the surgery, the MOP had noticed constant and increasing neck stiffness, specifically with looking up and down but not side to side. She also had noticed swelling behind both ears. She reported no substantial decrease in intake by mouth or decrease in urine or bowel frequency. On review of systems, she reported no fever, vomiting, difficulty breathing, bleeding from the mouth or nose, eye or ear drainage, or rash.

On physical examination, the patient was alert and in no acute distress; active and playful on an electronic device but was notably not moving their head, which was held in a forward-looking position without any signs of trauma. When asked, the child would not flex or extend their neck but would rotate a few degrees from neutral to both sides. Even with moving the electronic device up and down in space, no active neck extension or flexion could be elicited. The examination of the head, eyes, ears, nose, and throat was otherwise only remarkable for palpable and mildly tender postauricular lymph nodes and diffuse erythema in the posterior pharynx. Cardiopulmonary, abdominal, skin, and extremity examinations were unremarkable.

With concern for an infectious process, the physician ordered blood chemistry and hematology tests along with neck radiography. While awaiting the results, the patient was given a weight-based bolus of normal saline, and the home pain regimen was administered. An attempt was made to passively flex and extend the neck as the child slept in their mother’s arms, but the patient immediately awoke and began to cry.

All values of the comprehensive metabolic panel were within normal limits except for a slight elevation in the blood urea nitrogen to 21 mg/dL and glucose to 159 mg/dL. The complete blood count was unrevealing. The computed tomography (CT) scan with contrast of the soft tissues of the neck was limited by motion artifact but showed a head held in axial rotation with soft tissue irregularity in the anterior aspect of the adenoids (Figure 1). There was what appeared to be normal lymphadenopathy in the hypopharynx, but the soft tissues were otherwise unremarkable.

Discussion

Grisel syndrome is the atraumatic rotary subluxation of the atlantoaxial joint, specifically, the atlas (C1 vertebra) rotates to a fixed, nonanatomic position while the axis (C2 vertebra) remains in normal alignment in relation to the remainder of the spinal column. The subluxation occurs in the absence of ligamentous injury but is associated with an increase in ligamentous laxity.⁴ The atlas is a ring-shaped vertebra with 2 lateral masses connected by anterior and posterior arches; it lacks a spinous process unlike other vertebrae. It articulates with the skull by means of the 2 articular facets on the superior aspect of the lateral masses. Articulation with the axis occurs at 3 sites: 2 articular facets on the inferior portion of the lateral masses of the atlas and a facet for the dens on the posterior portion of the anterior arch. The dens projects superiorly from the body of the axis and is bound posteriorly by the transverse ligament of the atlas.⁵

The degree of subluxation seen in Grisel syndrome correlates to the disease severity and is classified by the Fielding and Hawkins (FH) system (Table). This system accounts for the distance from the atlas to the dens (atlantodens interval) and the relative asymmetry of the atlantoaxial joint.⁶ In a normal adult, the upper limit of normal for the atlantodens interval is 3 mm, whereas this distance increases to 4.5 mm for the pediatric population.⁷ Type I (FH-I) involves rotary subluxation alone without any increase in the atlantodens interval; in FH-II, that interval has increased from normal but to no more than 5 mm. FH-I and FH-II are the most encountered and are not associated with neurologic impairment. In FH-III, neurologic deficits can be present, and the atlantodens interval is increased to > 5 mm. Different from FH-II and FH-III in which anterior dislocation of the atlas with reference to the dens is observed, FH-IV involves a rotary movement of the atlas with concurrent posterior displacement and often involves spinal cord compression.⁶

Subluxation and displacement without trauma are key components of Grisel syndrome. The 2-hit hypothesis is often used to explain how this can occur, ie, 2 anomalies must be present simultaneously for this condition to develop. First, the laxity of the transverse ligament, the posterior wall of the dens, and other atlantoaxial ligaments must be increased. Second, an asymmetric contraction of the deep erector muscles of the neck either abruptly or more insidiously rotate and dislocate the atlas.⁸ The pathophysiology is not exactly understood, but the most commonly held hypothesis describes contiguous spread of infection or inflammatory mediators from the pharynx to the ligaments and muscles described.⁶

Spread could occur via the venous system. The posterior superior pharyngeal region is drained by the periodontoidal venous plexus; the connections here with the pharyngovertebral veins allow for the embolization of infectious or other proinflammatory material to the prevertebral fascia. These emboli induce fasciitis and subsequent aberrant relaxation of the ligaments. In reaction to the inflammation or increased laxity, contiguous muscles of the deep neck contract and freeze the joint out of anatomic alignment.⁴

The abnormal alignment is apparent grossly as torticollis. Most broadly, torticollis describes an anomalous head posture due to involuntary muscle contractions of neck muscles and specifically describes chin deviation to the side. The antecollis and retrocollis subtypes of torticollis describe forward flexion and backward extension of the neck, respectively.⁷ Torticollis (broadly) is the most frequently reported condition of those found to have Grisel syndrome (90.7%); other common presenting conditions include neck pain (81.5%) and neck stiffness (31.5%). Fever is found in only 27.8% of cases. Pediatric patients (aged ≤ 12 years) are the most commonly affected, accounting for 87% of cases with an observed 4:1 male to female predominance.^7,8 Symptoms begin most often within the first week from the inciting event in 85% of the cases.⁸ Head and neck surgery precedes up to 67% of cases, and infectious etiologies largely account for the remaining cases.⁷ Of the postsurgical cases, 55.6% had undergone T&A.⁸

Although anomalous head posture or neck stiffness following T&A would be of great clinic concern for Grisel syndrome, radiographic studies play a confirmatory role. CT scan is used to evaluate the bony structures, with 3D reconstruction of the cervical spine being most useful to determine the presence and degree of subluxation.⁸ Magnetic resonance imaging also aids in diagnosis to evaluate ligamentous structures in the area of concern as well as in the evaluation of spinal cord compression.⁶ Laboratory tests are largely unhelpful in making or excluding the diagnosis.⁸

If Grisel syndrome is suspected, both the original surgeon (if preceded by surgery) and the neurosurgical team should be consulted. Although no widely adopted guidelines exist for the management of this rare disease, general practice patterns have emerged with the degree of intervention predictably correlating to disease severity. FH-I is usually treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and muscle relaxants with or without a soft cervical collar. For FH-II, closed reduction and immobilization in a stiff cervical collar is recommended. If no neurologic defect is present, FH-III is treated with bed rest, a period of inline cervical traction, and subsequent immobilization. FH-III with neurologic sequelae and all FH-IV necessitate emergent neurosurgical consultation.⁴ Surgical intervention is a last resort but is required in up to 24.1% of cases.⁸

Antibiotic therapy is not routinely given unless clear infectious etiology is identified. No standard antibiotic regimen exists, but coverage for typical upper respiratory pathogens likely suffices. Empiric antibiotic therapy is not recommended for all causes of Grisel syndrome, ie, when the underlying cause is not yet elucidated.⁶ One case of Grisel syndrome occurring in the setting of cervical osteomyelitis has been described, though, and required prolonged IV antibiotics.³ Physical therapy is recommended as adjunct with no limitations for range of motion save for that of the patient’s individual pain threshold.⁴

Possibly attributable to waxing and waning ligamentous laxity and strength of the neck muscle contraction, the atlantodens interval and the degree of subluxation can change, making Grisel syndrome dynamic. As such, the FH classification can change, necessitating more or less aggressive therapy. A neurologic evaluation is recommended at least every 2 weeks after the diagnosis is made. If initial identification or recognition of known disease progression is delayed, serious complications can develop. Acutely, spinal cord compression can lead to quadriplegia and death; more insidious complications include reduced neck mobility, dysphonia, and dysphagia.⁴ As serious, life-threatening complications can arise from Grisel syndrome while good functional outcomes can be achieved with timely and appropriate treatment, the clinician should be inspired to have a high clinical suspicion for this syndrome given the right context.

Conclusions

The patient experienced a desirable outcome with minimal, conservative treatment. As such, the pathology in this case was likely attributed to the mildest form of Grisel syndrome (FH-I). The follow-up was reassuring as well, revealing no worsening or progression of symptoms. The initial evaluation in this case was limited by the inadequacy of the CT scan. Motion artifact in the pharynx prevented the definite exclusion of deep space infection, while the rotation of the head in combination with motion artifact in the cranial-most portions of the vertebral column made determining alignment difficult. One clear axial image, though, does show rotation of the atlas (Figure 2). The uncertainty at the end of our workup prompted surgical consultation, not, admittedly, concern for Grisel syndrome. Awareness of this disease entity is nevertheless important and clinically relevant. Early identification and treatment is associated with decreased morbidity and improvement in long-term functional outcomes.⁶ Despite its rarity, the clinician should consider Grisel syndrome in any pediatric patient presenting with neck stiffness following the commonly performed T&A.

Tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy (T&A) is the second most common pediatric surgical procedure in the United States.¹ It is most often performed during childhood between 5 and 8 years of age with a second peak observed between 17 and 21 years of age in the adolescent and young adult populations.² While recurrent tonsillitis has been traditionally associated with tonsillectomy, sleep disordered breathing with obstructive sleep apnea is now the primary indication for the procedure.¹

Up to 97% of T&As are performed as an outpatient same-day surgery not requiring inpatient admission.² Although largely a safe and routinely performed surgery, several complications have been described. Due to the outpatient nature of the procedure, the complications are often encountered in the emergency department (ED) and sometimes in primary care settings. Common complications (outside of the perioperative time frame) include nausea, vomiting, otalgia, odynophagia, infection of the throat (broadly), and hemorrhage; uncommon complications include subcutaneous emphysema, taste disorders, and Eagle syndrome. Some complications are rarer still and carry significant morbidity and even mortality, including mediastinitis, cervical osteomyelitis, and Grisel syndrome.³ The following case encourages the clinician to expand the differential for a patient presenting after T&A.

Case Presentation

A child aged < 3 years was brought to the ED by their mother. She reported neck pain and stiffness 10 days after T&A with concurrent tympanostomy tube placement at an outside pediatric hospital. At triage, their heart rate was 94 bpm, temperature was 98.2 °F, respiratory rate, 22 breaths per minute, and oxygen saturation, 97% on room air. The mother of the patient (MOP) had been giving the prescribed oral liquid formulations of ibuprofen and acetaminophen with hydrocodone as directed. No drug allergies were reported, and immunizations were up to date for age. Other medical and surgical history included eczema and remote cutaneous hemangioma resection. The patient lived at home with 2 parents and was not exposed to smoke; their family history was noncontributory.

Since the surgery, the MOP had noticed constant and increasing neck stiffness, specifically with looking up and down but not side to side. She also had noticed swelling behind both ears. She reported no substantial decrease in intake by mouth or decrease in urine or bowel frequency. On review of systems, she reported no fever, vomiting, difficulty breathing, bleeding from the mouth or nose, eye or ear drainage, or rash.

On physical examination, the patient was alert and in no acute distress; active and playful on an electronic device but was notably not moving their head, which was held in a forward-looking position without any signs of trauma. When asked, the child would not flex or extend their neck but would rotate a few degrees from neutral to both sides. Even with moving the electronic device up and down in space, no active neck extension or flexion could be elicited. The examination of the head, eyes, ears, nose, and throat was otherwise only remarkable for palpable and mildly tender postauricular lymph nodes and diffuse erythema in the posterior pharynx. Cardiopulmonary, abdominal, skin, and extremity examinations were unremarkable.

With concern for an infectious process, the physician ordered blood chemistry and hematology tests along with neck radiography. While awaiting the results, the patient was given a weight-based bolus of normal saline, and the home pain regimen was administered. An attempt was made to passively flex and extend the neck as the child slept in their mother’s arms, but the patient immediately awoke and began to cry.

All values of the comprehensive metabolic panel were within normal limits except for a slight elevation in the blood urea nitrogen to 21 mg/dL and glucose to 159 mg/dL. The complete blood count was unrevealing. The computed tomography (CT) scan with contrast of the soft tissues of the neck was limited by motion artifact but showed a head held in axial rotation with soft tissue irregularity in the anterior aspect of the adenoids (Figure 1). There was what appeared to be normal lymphadenopathy in the hypopharynx, but the soft tissues were otherwise unremarkable.

Discussion

Grisel syndrome is the atraumatic rotary subluxation of the atlantoaxial joint, specifically, the atlas (C1 vertebra) rotates to a fixed, nonanatomic position while the axis (C2 vertebra) remains in normal alignment in relation to the remainder of the spinal column. The subluxation occurs in the absence of ligamentous injury but is associated with an increase in ligamentous laxity.⁴ The atlas is a ring-shaped vertebra with 2 lateral masses connected by anterior and posterior arches; it lacks a spinous process unlike other vertebrae. It articulates with the skull by means of the 2 articular facets on the superior aspect of the lateral masses. Articulation with the axis occurs at 3 sites: 2 articular facets on the inferior portion of the lateral masses of the atlas and a facet for the dens on the posterior portion of the anterior arch. The dens projects superiorly from the body of the axis and is bound posteriorly by the transverse ligament of the atlas.⁵

The degree of subluxation seen in Grisel syndrome correlates to the disease severity and is classified by the Fielding and Hawkins (FH) system (Table). This system accounts for the distance from the atlas to the dens (atlantodens interval) and the relative asymmetry of the atlantoaxial joint.⁶ In a normal adult, the upper limit of normal for the atlantodens interval is 3 mm, whereas this distance increases to 4.5 mm for the pediatric population.⁷ Type I (FH-I) involves rotary subluxation alone without any increase in the atlantodens interval; in FH-II, that interval has increased from normal but to no more than 5 mm. FH-I and FH-II are the most encountered and are not associated with neurologic impairment. In FH-III, neurologic deficits can be present, and the atlantodens interval is increased to > 5 mm. Different from FH-II and FH-III in which anterior dislocation of the atlas with reference to the dens is observed, FH-IV involves a rotary movement of the atlas with concurrent posterior displacement and often involves spinal cord compression.⁶

Subluxation and displacement without trauma are key components of Grisel syndrome. The 2-hit hypothesis is often used to explain how this can occur, ie, 2 anomalies must be present simultaneously for this condition to develop. First, the laxity of the transverse ligament, the posterior wall of the dens, and other atlantoaxial ligaments must be increased. Second, an asymmetric contraction of the deep erector muscles of the neck either abruptly or more insidiously rotate and dislocate the atlas.⁸ The pathophysiology is not exactly understood, but the most commonly held hypothesis describes contiguous spread of infection or inflammatory mediators from the pharynx to the ligaments and muscles described.⁶

Spread could occur via the venous system. The posterior superior pharyngeal region is drained by the periodontoidal venous plexus; the connections here with the pharyngovertebral veins allow for the embolization of infectious or other proinflammatory material to the prevertebral fascia. These emboli induce fasciitis and subsequent aberrant relaxation of the ligaments. In reaction to the inflammation or increased laxity, contiguous muscles of the deep neck contract and freeze the joint out of anatomic alignment.⁴

The abnormal alignment is apparent grossly as torticollis. Most broadly, torticollis describes an anomalous head posture due to involuntary muscle contractions of neck muscles and specifically describes chin deviation to the side. The antecollis and retrocollis subtypes of torticollis describe forward flexion and backward extension of the neck, respectively.⁷ Torticollis (broadly) is the most frequently reported condition of those found to have Grisel syndrome (90.7%); other common presenting conditions include neck pain (81.5%) and neck stiffness (31.5%). Fever is found in only 27.8% of cases. Pediatric patients (aged ≤ 12 years) are the most commonly affected, accounting for 87% of cases with an observed 4:1 male to female predominance.^7,8 Symptoms begin most often within the first week from the inciting event in 85% of the cases.⁸ Head and neck surgery precedes up to 67% of cases, and infectious etiologies largely account for the remaining cases.⁷ Of the postsurgical cases, 55.6% had undergone T&A.⁸

Although anomalous head posture or neck stiffness following T&A would be of great clinic concern for Grisel syndrome, radiographic studies play a confirmatory role. CT scan is used to evaluate the bony structures, with 3D reconstruction of the cervical spine being most useful to determine the presence and degree of subluxation.⁸ Magnetic resonance imaging also aids in diagnosis to evaluate ligamentous structures in the area of concern as well as in the evaluation of spinal cord compression.⁶ Laboratory tests are largely unhelpful in making or excluding the diagnosis.⁸

If Grisel syndrome is suspected, both the original surgeon (if preceded by surgery) and the neurosurgical team should be consulted. Although no widely adopted guidelines exist for the management of this rare disease, general practice patterns have emerged with the degree of intervention predictably correlating to disease severity. FH-I is usually treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and muscle relaxants with or without a soft cervical collar. For FH-II, closed reduction and immobilization in a stiff cervical collar is recommended. If no neurologic defect is present, FH-III is treated with bed rest, a period of inline cervical traction, and subsequent immobilization. FH-III with neurologic sequelae and all FH-IV necessitate emergent neurosurgical consultation.⁴ Surgical intervention is a last resort but is required in up to 24.1% of cases.⁸

Antibiotic therapy is not routinely given unless clear infectious etiology is identified. No standard antibiotic regimen exists, but coverage for typical upper respiratory pathogens likely suffices. Empiric antibiotic therapy is not recommended for all causes of Grisel syndrome, ie, when the underlying cause is not yet elucidated.⁶ One case of Grisel syndrome occurring in the setting of cervical osteomyelitis has been described, though, and required prolonged IV antibiotics.³ Physical therapy is recommended as adjunct with no limitations for range of motion save for that of the patient’s individual pain threshold.⁴

Possibly attributable to waxing and waning ligamentous laxity and strength of the neck muscle contraction, the atlantodens interval and the degree of subluxation can change, making Grisel syndrome dynamic. As such, the FH classification can change, necessitating more or less aggressive therapy. A neurologic evaluation is recommended at least every 2 weeks after the diagnosis is made. If initial identification or recognition of known disease progression is delayed, serious complications can develop. Acutely, spinal cord compression can lead to quadriplegia and death; more insidious complications include reduced neck mobility, dysphonia, and dysphagia.⁴ As serious, life-threatening complications can arise from Grisel syndrome while good functional outcomes can be achieved with timely and appropriate treatment, the clinician should be inspired to have a high clinical suspicion for this syndrome given the right context.

Conclusions

The patient experienced a desirable outcome with minimal, conservative treatment. As such, the pathology in this case was likely attributed to the mildest form of Grisel syndrome (FH-I). The follow-up was reassuring as well, revealing no worsening or progression of symptoms. The initial evaluation in this case was limited by the inadequacy of the CT scan. Motion artifact in the pharynx prevented the definite exclusion of deep space infection, while the rotation of the head in combination with motion artifact in the cranial-most portions of the vertebral column made determining alignment difficult. One clear axial image, though, does show rotation of the atlas (Figure 2). The uncertainty at the end of our workup prompted surgical consultation, not, admittedly, concern for Grisel syndrome. Awareness of this disease entity is nevertheless important and clinically relevant. Early identification and treatment is associated with decreased morbidity and improvement in long-term functional outcomes.⁶ Despite its rarity, the clinician should consider Grisel syndrome in any pediatric patient presenting with neck stiffness following the commonly performed T&A.

Tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy (T&A) is the second most common pediatric surgical procedure in the United States.¹ It is most often performed during childhood between 5 and 8 years of age with a second peak observed between 17 and 21 years of age in the adolescent and young adult populations.² While recurrent tonsillitis has been traditionally associated with tonsillectomy, sleep disordered breathing with obstructive sleep apnea is now the primary indication for the procedure.¹

Up to 97% of T&As are performed as an outpatient same-day surgery not requiring inpatient admission.² Although largely a safe and routinely performed surgery, several complications have been described. Due to the outpatient nature of the procedure, the complications are often encountered in the emergency department (ED) and sometimes in primary care settings. Common complications (outside of the perioperative time frame) include nausea, vomiting, otalgia, odynophagia, infection of the throat (broadly), and hemorrhage; uncommon complications include subcutaneous emphysema, taste disorders, and Eagle syndrome. Some complications are rarer still and carry significant morbidity and even mortality, including mediastinitis, cervical osteomyelitis, and Grisel syndrome.³ The following case encourages the clinician to expand the differential for a patient presenting after T&A.

Case Presentation

A child aged < 3 years was brought to the ED by their mother. She reported neck pain and stiffness 10 days after T&A with concurrent tympanostomy tube placement at an outside pediatric hospital. At triage, their heart rate was 94 bpm, temperature was 98.2 °F, respiratory rate, 22 breaths per minute, and oxygen saturation, 97% on room air. The mother of the patient (MOP) had been giving the prescribed oral liquid formulations of ibuprofen and acetaminophen with hydrocodone as directed. No drug allergies were reported, and immunizations were up to date for age. Other medical and surgical history included eczema and remote cutaneous hemangioma resection. The patient lived at home with 2 parents and was not exposed to smoke; their family history was noncontributory.

Since the surgery, the MOP had noticed constant and increasing neck stiffness, specifically with looking up and down but not side to side. She also had noticed swelling behind both ears. She reported no substantial decrease in intake by mouth or decrease in urine or bowel frequency. On review of systems, she reported no fever, vomiting, difficulty breathing, bleeding from the mouth or nose, eye or ear drainage, or rash.

On physical examination, the patient was alert and in no acute distress; active and playful on an electronic device but was notably not moving their head, which was held in a forward-looking position without any signs of trauma. When asked, the child would not flex or extend their neck but would rotate a few degrees from neutral to both sides. Even with moving the electronic device up and down in space, no active neck extension or flexion could be elicited. The examination of the head, eyes, ears, nose, and throat was otherwise only remarkable for palpable and mildly tender postauricular lymph nodes and diffuse erythema in the posterior pharynx. Cardiopulmonary, abdominal, skin, and extremity examinations were unremarkable.

With concern for an infectious process, the physician ordered blood chemistry and hematology tests along with neck radiography. While awaiting the results, the patient was given a weight-based bolus of normal saline, and the home pain regimen was administered. An attempt was made to passively flex and extend the neck as the child slept in their mother’s arms, but the patient immediately awoke and began to cry.

All values of the comprehensive metabolic panel were within normal limits except for a slight elevation in the blood urea nitrogen to 21 mg/dL and glucose to 159 mg/dL. The complete blood count was unrevealing. The computed tomography (CT) scan with contrast of the soft tissues of the neck was limited by motion artifact but showed a head held in axial rotation with soft tissue irregularity in the anterior aspect of the adenoids (Figure 1). There was what appeared to be normal lymphadenopathy in the hypopharynx, but the soft tissues were otherwise unremarkable.

Discussion

Grisel syndrome is the atraumatic rotary subluxation of the atlantoaxial joint, specifically, the atlas (C1 vertebra) rotates to a fixed, nonanatomic position while the axis (C2 vertebra) remains in normal alignment in relation to the remainder of the spinal column. The subluxation occurs in the absence of ligamentous injury but is associated with an increase in ligamentous laxity.⁴ The atlas is a ring-shaped vertebra with 2 lateral masses connected by anterior and posterior arches; it lacks a spinous process unlike other vertebrae. It articulates with the skull by means of the 2 articular facets on the superior aspect of the lateral masses. Articulation with the axis occurs at 3 sites: 2 articular facets on the inferior portion of the lateral masses of the atlas and a facet for the dens on the posterior portion of the anterior arch. The dens projects superiorly from the body of the axis and is bound posteriorly by the transverse ligament of the atlas.⁵

The degree of subluxation seen in Grisel syndrome correlates to the disease severity and is classified by the Fielding and Hawkins (FH) system (Table). This system accounts for the distance from the atlas to the dens (atlantodens interval) and the relative asymmetry of the atlantoaxial joint.⁶ In a normal adult, the upper limit of normal for the atlantodens interval is 3 mm, whereas this distance increases to 4.5 mm for the pediatric population.⁷ Type I (FH-I) involves rotary subluxation alone without any increase in the atlantodens interval; in FH-II, that interval has increased from normal but to no more than 5 mm. FH-I and FH-II are the most encountered and are not associated with neurologic impairment. In FH-III, neurologic deficits can be present, and the atlantodens interval is increased to > 5 mm. Different from FH-II and FH-III in which anterior dislocation of the atlas with reference to the dens is observed, FH-IV involves a rotary movement of the atlas with concurrent posterior displacement and often involves spinal cord compression.⁶

Subluxation and displacement without trauma are key components of Grisel syndrome. The 2-hit hypothesis is often used to explain how this can occur, ie, 2 anomalies must be present simultaneously for this condition to develop. First, the laxity of the transverse ligament, the posterior wall of the dens, and other atlantoaxial ligaments must be increased. Second, an asymmetric contraction of the deep erector muscles of the neck either abruptly or more insidiously rotate and dislocate the atlas.⁸ The pathophysiology is not exactly understood, but the most commonly held hypothesis describes contiguous spread of infection or inflammatory mediators from the pharynx to the ligaments and muscles described.⁶

Spread could occur via the venous system. The posterior superior pharyngeal region is drained by the periodontoidal venous plexus; the connections here with the pharyngovertebral veins allow for the embolization of infectious or other proinflammatory material to the prevertebral fascia. These emboli induce fasciitis and subsequent aberrant relaxation of the ligaments. In reaction to the inflammation or increased laxity, contiguous muscles of the deep neck contract and freeze the joint out of anatomic alignment.⁴

The abnormal alignment is apparent grossly as torticollis. Most broadly, torticollis describes an anomalous head posture due to involuntary muscle contractions of neck muscles and specifically describes chin deviation to the side. The antecollis and retrocollis subtypes of torticollis describe forward flexion and backward extension of the neck, respectively.⁷ Torticollis (broadly) is the most frequently reported condition of those found to have Grisel syndrome (90.7%); other common presenting conditions include neck pain (81.5%) and neck stiffness (31.5%). Fever is found in only 27.8% of cases. Pediatric patients (aged ≤ 12 years) are the most commonly affected, accounting for 87% of cases with an observed 4:1 male to female predominance.^7,8 Symptoms begin most often within the first week from the inciting event in 85% of the cases.⁸ Head and neck surgery precedes up to 67% of cases, and infectious etiologies largely account for the remaining cases.⁷ Of the postsurgical cases, 55.6% had undergone T&A.⁸

Although anomalous head posture or neck stiffness following T&A would be of great clinic concern for Grisel syndrome, radiographic studies play a confirmatory role. CT scan is used to evaluate the bony structures, with 3D reconstruction of the cervical spine being most useful to determine the presence and degree of subluxation.⁸ Magnetic resonance imaging also aids in diagnosis to evaluate ligamentous structures in the area of concern as well as in the evaluation of spinal cord compression.⁶ Laboratory tests are largely unhelpful in making or excluding the diagnosis.⁸

If Grisel syndrome is suspected, both the original surgeon (if preceded by surgery) and the neurosurgical team should be consulted. Although no widely adopted guidelines exist for the management of this rare disease, general practice patterns have emerged with the degree of intervention predictably correlating to disease severity. FH-I is usually treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and muscle relaxants with or without a soft cervical collar. For FH-II, closed reduction and immobilization in a stiff cervical collar is recommended. If no neurologic defect is present, FH-III is treated with bed rest, a period of inline cervical traction, and subsequent immobilization. FH-III with neurologic sequelae and all FH-IV necessitate emergent neurosurgical consultation.⁴ Surgical intervention is a last resort but is required in up to 24.1% of cases.⁸

Antibiotic therapy is not routinely given unless clear infectious etiology is identified. No standard antibiotic regimen exists, but coverage for typical upper respiratory pathogens likely suffices. Empiric antibiotic therapy is not recommended for all causes of Grisel syndrome, ie, when the underlying cause is not yet elucidated.⁶ One case of Grisel syndrome occurring in the setting of cervical osteomyelitis has been described, though, and required prolonged IV antibiotics.³ Physical therapy is recommended as adjunct with no limitations for range of motion save for that of the patient’s individual pain threshold.⁴

Possibly attributable to waxing and waning ligamentous laxity and strength of the neck muscle contraction, the atlantodens interval and the degree of subluxation can change, making Grisel syndrome dynamic. As such, the FH classification can change, necessitating more or less aggressive therapy. A neurologic evaluation is recommended at least every 2 weeks after the diagnosis is made. If initial identification or recognition of known disease progression is delayed, serious complications can develop. Acutely, spinal cord compression can lead to quadriplegia and death; more insidious complications include reduced neck mobility, dysphonia, and dysphagia.⁴ As serious, life-threatening complications can arise from Grisel syndrome while good functional outcomes can be achieved with timely and appropriate treatment, the clinician should be inspired to have a high clinical suspicion for this syndrome given the right context.

Conclusions

The patient experienced a desirable outcome with minimal, conservative treatment. As such, the pathology in this case was likely attributed to the mildest form of Grisel syndrome (FH-I). The follow-up was reassuring as well, revealing no worsening or progression of symptoms. The initial evaluation in this case was limited by the inadequacy of the CT scan. Motion artifact in the pharynx prevented the definite exclusion of deep space infection, while the rotation of the head in combination with motion artifact in the cranial-most portions of the vertebral column made determining alignment difficult. One clear axial image, though, does show rotation of the atlas (Figure 2). The uncertainty at the end of our workup prompted surgical consultation, not, admittedly, concern for Grisel syndrome. Awareness of this disease entity is nevertheless important and clinically relevant. Early identification and treatment is associated with decreased morbidity and improvement in long-term functional outcomes.⁶ Despite its rarity, the clinician should consider Grisel syndrome in any pediatric patient presenting with neck stiffness following the commonly performed T&A.

Gallbladder duplication is a congenital abnormality of the hepatobiliary system and often is not considered in the evaluation of a patient with right upper quadrant pain. Accuracy of the most commonly used imaging study to assess for biliary disease, abdominal ultrasound, is highly dependent on the skills of the ultrasonographer, and given its relative rarity, this condition is often not considered prior to planned cholecystectomy.¹ Small case reviews found that < 50% of gallbladder duplications are diagnosed preoperatively despite use of ultrasound or computed tomography (CT) scan.^2-4 Failure to recognize duplicate gallbladder anatomy in symptomatic patients may result in incomplete surgical management, an increase in perioperative complications, and years of morbidity due to unresolved symptoms. Once a patient has had a cholecystectomy, symptoms are presumed to be due to a nonbiliary etiology and an extensive, often repetitive, workup is pursued before “repeat cholecystectomy” is considered.⁵

Case Presentation

A 63-year-old man was referred to gastroenterology for recurrent episodic right upper quadrant pain. He reported intermittent both right and left upper abdominal pain that was variable in quality. At times it was associated with an empty stomach prior to meals; at other times, onset was 30 to 60 minutes after meals. The patient also reported significant flatulence and bloating and intermittent loose stools. Sixteen years before, he underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. He reported that the pain he experienced before the cholecystectomy never resolved after surgery but occurred less frequently. For the next 16 years, the patient did not seek evaluation of his ongoing but infrequent symptoms until his pain became a daily occurrence. The patient’s surgical history included a remote open vagotomy and antrectomy for peptic ulcer disease, laparoscopic appendectomy, and a laparoscopic cholecystectomy for reported biliary colic.

The gastroenterology evaluation included a colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD); both were benign and without findings specific to identify the etiology for the patient’s pain. The patient was given a course of rifaximin 1200 mg daily for 7 days for possible bacterial overgrowth and placed on a proton pump inhibitor twice daily. Neither of these interventions helped resolve the patient’s symptoms. Further workup was pursued by gastroenterology to include a right upper quadrant ultrasound that showed a structure most consistent with a small gallbladder containing a small polyp vs stone. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) also was performed and showed the presence of a small gallbladder with a small 2-mm filling defect and an otherwise benign biliary tree. MRCP images and EGD documented a Billroth 1 reconstruction at the time of his remote antrectomy and vagotomy (Figure 1).

Discussion

The first reported human case of gallbladder duplication was noted in a sacrificial victim of Emperor Augustus in 31 BCE. Sherren reported the first documented case of double accessory gallbladder in a living human in 1911.^1,6 Though the exact incidence of gallbladder duplication is not fully known due to primary documentation from case reports, incidence is approximately 1 in 4000 to 5000 people. It was first formally classified by Boyden in 1926.⁷ Further anatomic classification based on morphology and embryogenesis was delineated by Harlaftis and colleagues in 1977, establishing type 1 and 2 structures of a duplicated gallbladder.⁸ Type 1 duplicated gallbladder anatomy shares a single cystic duct, whereas in type 2 each gallbladder has its own cystic duct. Later reports and studies identified triple gallbladders as well as trabecular variants with the most common classification used currently being the modified Harlaftis classification.^9,10

The case presented here most likely represents either a Y-shaped type 1 primordial gallbladder or a type 2 accessory gallbladder based on historical data and intraoperative cholangiogram findings at the time of repeat cholecystectomy. Gallbladder duplication is clinically indistinguishable from regular gallbladder pathology preoperatively and can only be identified on imaging or intraoperatively.¹¹ Prior case reports and studies have found that it is frequently missed on preoperative abdominal ultrasonography and CT in up to 50% of cases.^12-14

The differential diagnosis of gallbladder duplication seen on preoperative imaging includes a gallbladder diverticulum, choledochal cyst, focal adenonomyomatosis, Phrygian cap, or folded gallbladder.^1,2 Historically, the most definitive test for gallbladder duplication has been either intraoperative cholangiography, which can also clarify biliary anatomy, or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with cholangiography.^1,3 The debate over routine use of intraoperative cholangiography has been ongoing for the past several decades.¹⁵ Though intraoperative cholangiogram remains one of the most definitive tests for gallbladder duplication, given the overall low incidence of this variant, recommendation for routine intraoperative cholangiography solely to rule out gallbladder duplication cannot be definitively recommended based on our review of the literature. Currently, preoperative MRCP is the study of choice when there is concern from historical facts or from other imaging of gallbladder duplication as it is noninvasive and has a high degree of detail, particularly with 3D reconstructions.^14,16 At the time of surgery, the most critical step to avoid inadvertent ductal injury is clear visualization of ductal anatomy and obtaining the critical view of safety.¹⁷ Though this will also assist in identifying some cases of gallbladder duplication, given the great variation of duplication, it will not prevent missing some variants. In our case, extensive local scarring from the patient’s prior antrectomy and vagotomy along with lack of the use of intraoperative cholangiography likely contributed to missing his duplication at the time of his index cholecystectomy.

Undiagnosed gallbladder duplication can lead to additional morbidity related to common entities associated with gallbladder pathology, such as biliary colic, cholecystitis, cholangitis, and pancreatitis. Additionally, case reports in the literature have documented more rare associations, such as empyema, carcinoma, cholecystoenteric fistula, and torsion, all associated with a duplicated gallbladder.^18-21 Once identified pre- or intraoperatively, it is generally recommended that all gallbladders be removed in symptomatic patients and that intraoperative cholangiography be done to assure complete resection of the duplicated gallbladders and to avoid injury to the biliary trees.^22-25

Conclusions

Gallbladder duplication and other congenital biliary anatomic variations should be considered before a biliary operation and included in the differential diagnosis when evaluating patients who have clinical symptoms consistent with biliary pathology. In addition, intraoperative cholangiogram should be performed during cholecystectomy if the inferior liver edge cannot be visualized well, as in the case of this patient where a prior foregut operation resulted in extensive adhesive disease. Intraoperative cholangiogram also should be considered in patients whose preoperative imaging does not visualize the right upper quadrant well due to patient habitus. Doing so may identify gallbladder duplication and allow for complete cholecystectomy as well as proper identification and management of cystic duct variants. Awareness and consideration of duplicated biliary variants can help prevent intraoperative complications related to biliary anomalies and avoid the morbidity related to recurrent biliary disease and the need for repeat operative procedures.

Acknowledgments

We extend our thanks to Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Healthcare System and the Departments of Surgery and Radiology for their support of this case report, and Lorrie Langdale, MD, and Roger Tatum, MD, for their mentorship of this project

Gallbladder duplication is a congenital abnormality of the hepatobiliary system and often is not considered in the evaluation of a patient with right upper quadrant pain. Accuracy of the most commonly used imaging study to assess for biliary disease, abdominal ultrasound, is highly dependent on the skills of the ultrasonographer, and given its relative rarity, this condition is often not considered prior to planned cholecystectomy.¹ Small case reviews found that < 50% of gallbladder duplications are diagnosed preoperatively despite use of ultrasound or computed tomography (CT) scan.^2-4 Failure to recognize duplicate gallbladder anatomy in symptomatic patients may result in incomplete surgical management, an increase in perioperative complications, and years of morbidity due to unresolved symptoms. Once a patient has had a cholecystectomy, symptoms are presumed to be due to a nonbiliary etiology and an extensive, often repetitive, workup is pursued before “repeat cholecystectomy” is considered.⁵

Case Presentation

A 63-year-old man was referred to gastroenterology for recurrent episodic right upper quadrant pain. He reported intermittent both right and left upper abdominal pain that was variable in quality. At times it was associated with an empty stomach prior to meals; at other times, onset was 30 to 60 minutes after meals. The patient also reported significant flatulence and bloating and intermittent loose stools. Sixteen years before, he underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. He reported that the pain he experienced before the cholecystectomy never resolved after surgery but occurred less frequently. For the next 16 years, the patient did not seek evaluation of his ongoing but infrequent symptoms until his pain became a daily occurrence. The patient’s surgical history included a remote open vagotomy and antrectomy for peptic ulcer disease, laparoscopic appendectomy, and a laparoscopic cholecystectomy for reported biliary colic.

The gastroenterology evaluation included a colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD); both were benign and without findings specific to identify the etiology for the patient’s pain. The patient was given a course of rifaximin 1200 mg daily for 7 days for possible bacterial overgrowth and placed on a proton pump inhibitor twice daily. Neither of these interventions helped resolve the patient’s symptoms. Further workup was pursued by gastroenterology to include a right upper quadrant ultrasound that showed a structure most consistent with a small gallbladder containing a small polyp vs stone. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) also was performed and showed the presence of a small gallbladder with a small 2-mm filling defect and an otherwise benign biliary tree. MRCP images and EGD documented a Billroth 1 reconstruction at the time of his remote antrectomy and vagotomy (Figure 1).

Discussion

The first reported human case of gallbladder duplication was noted in a sacrificial victim of Emperor Augustus in 31 BCE. Sherren reported the first documented case of double accessory gallbladder in a living human in 1911.^1,6 Though the exact incidence of gallbladder duplication is not fully known due to primary documentation from case reports, incidence is approximately 1 in 4000 to 5000 people. It was first formally classified by Boyden in 1926.⁷ Further anatomic classification based on morphology and embryogenesis was delineated by Harlaftis and colleagues in 1977, establishing type 1 and 2 structures of a duplicated gallbladder.⁸ Type 1 duplicated gallbladder anatomy shares a single cystic duct, whereas in type 2 each gallbladder has its own cystic duct. Later reports and studies identified triple gallbladders as well as trabecular variants with the most common classification used currently being the modified Harlaftis classification.^9,10

The case presented here most likely represents either a Y-shaped type 1 primordial gallbladder or a type 2 accessory gallbladder based on historical data and intraoperative cholangiogram findings at the time of repeat cholecystectomy. Gallbladder duplication is clinically indistinguishable from regular gallbladder pathology preoperatively and can only be identified on imaging or intraoperatively.¹¹ Prior case reports and studies have found that it is frequently missed on preoperative abdominal ultrasonography and CT in up to 50% of cases.^12-14

The differential diagnosis of gallbladder duplication seen on preoperative imaging includes a gallbladder diverticulum, choledochal cyst, focal adenonomyomatosis, Phrygian cap, or folded gallbladder.^1,2 Historically, the most definitive test for gallbladder duplication has been either intraoperative cholangiography, which can also clarify biliary anatomy, or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with cholangiography.^1,3 The debate over routine use of intraoperative cholangiography has been ongoing for the past several decades.¹⁵ Though intraoperative cholangiogram remains one of the most definitive tests for gallbladder duplication, given the overall low incidence of this variant, recommendation for routine intraoperative cholangiography solely to rule out gallbladder duplication cannot be definitively recommended based on our review of the literature. Currently, preoperative MRCP is the study of choice when there is concern from historical facts or from other imaging of gallbladder duplication as it is noninvasive and has a high degree of detail, particularly with 3D reconstructions.^14,16 At the time of surgery, the most critical step to avoid inadvertent ductal injury is clear visualization of ductal anatomy and obtaining the critical view of safety.¹⁷ Though this will also assist in identifying some cases of gallbladder duplication, given the great variation of duplication, it will not prevent missing some variants. In our case, extensive local scarring from the patient’s prior antrectomy and vagotomy along with lack of the use of intraoperative cholangiography likely contributed to missing his duplication at the time of his index cholecystectomy.

Undiagnosed gallbladder duplication can lead to additional morbidity related to common entities associated with gallbladder pathology, such as biliary colic, cholecystitis, cholangitis, and pancreatitis. Additionally, case reports in the literature have documented more rare associations, such as empyema, carcinoma, cholecystoenteric fistula, and torsion, all associated with a duplicated gallbladder.^18-21 Once identified pre- or intraoperatively, it is generally recommended that all gallbladders be removed in symptomatic patients and that intraoperative cholangiography be done to assure complete resection of the duplicated gallbladders and to avoid injury to the biliary trees.^22-25

Conclusions

Gallbladder duplication and other congenital biliary anatomic variations should be considered before a biliary operation and included in the differential diagnosis when evaluating patients who have clinical symptoms consistent with biliary pathology. In addition, intraoperative cholangiogram should be performed during cholecystectomy if the inferior liver edge cannot be visualized well, as in the case of this patient where a prior foregut operation resulted in extensive adhesive disease. Intraoperative cholangiogram also should be considered in patients whose preoperative imaging does not visualize the right upper quadrant well due to patient habitus. Doing so may identify gallbladder duplication and allow for complete cholecystectomy as well as proper identification and management of cystic duct variants. Awareness and consideration of duplicated biliary variants can help prevent intraoperative complications related to biliary anomalies and avoid the morbidity related to recurrent biliary disease and the need for repeat operative procedures.

Acknowledgments

We extend our thanks to Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Healthcare System and the Departments of Surgery and Radiology for their support of this case report, and Lorrie Langdale, MD, and Roger Tatum, MD, for their mentorship of this project

Gallbladder duplication is a congenital abnormality of the hepatobiliary system and often is not considered in the evaluation of a patient with right upper quadrant pain. Accuracy of the most commonly used imaging study to assess for biliary disease, abdominal ultrasound, is highly dependent on the skills of the ultrasonographer, and given its relative rarity, this condition is often not considered prior to planned cholecystectomy.¹ Small case reviews found that < 50% of gallbladder duplications are diagnosed preoperatively despite use of ultrasound or computed tomography (CT) scan.^2-4 Failure to recognize duplicate gallbladder anatomy in symptomatic patients may result in incomplete surgical management, an increase in perioperative complications, and years of morbidity due to unresolved symptoms. Once a patient has had a cholecystectomy, symptoms are presumed to be due to a nonbiliary etiology and an extensive, often repetitive, workup is pursued before “repeat cholecystectomy” is considered.⁵

Case Presentation

A 63-year-old man was referred to gastroenterology for recurrent episodic right upper quadrant pain. He reported intermittent both right and left upper abdominal pain that was variable in quality. At times it was associated with an empty stomach prior to meals; at other times, onset was 30 to 60 minutes after meals. The patient also reported significant flatulence and bloating and intermittent loose stools. Sixteen years before, he underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. He reported that the pain he experienced before the cholecystectomy never resolved after surgery but occurred less frequently. For the next 16 years, the patient did not seek evaluation of his ongoing but infrequent symptoms until his pain became a daily occurrence. The patient’s surgical history included a remote open vagotomy and antrectomy for peptic ulcer disease, laparoscopic appendectomy, and a laparoscopic cholecystectomy for reported biliary colic.

The gastroenterology evaluation included a colonoscopy and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD); both were benign and without findings specific to identify the etiology for the patient’s pain. The patient was given a course of rifaximin 1200 mg daily for 7 days for possible bacterial overgrowth and placed on a proton pump inhibitor twice daily. Neither of these interventions helped resolve the patient’s symptoms. Further workup was pursued by gastroenterology to include a right upper quadrant ultrasound that showed a structure most consistent with a small gallbladder containing a small polyp vs stone. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) also was performed and showed the presence of a small gallbladder with a small 2-mm filling defect and an otherwise benign biliary tree. MRCP images and EGD documented a Billroth 1 reconstruction at the time of his remote antrectomy and vagotomy (Figure 1).

Discussion

The first reported human case of gallbladder duplication was noted in a sacrificial victim of Emperor Augustus in 31 BCE. Sherren reported the first documented case of double accessory gallbladder in a living human in 1911.^1,6 Though the exact incidence of gallbladder duplication is not fully known due to primary documentation from case reports, incidence is approximately 1 in 4000 to 5000 people. It was first formally classified by Boyden in 1926.⁷ Further anatomic classification based on morphology and embryogenesis was delineated by Harlaftis and colleagues in 1977, establishing type 1 and 2 structures of a duplicated gallbladder.⁸ Type 1 duplicated gallbladder anatomy shares a single cystic duct, whereas in type 2 each gallbladder has its own cystic duct. Later reports and studies identified triple gallbladders as well as trabecular variants with the most common classification used currently being the modified Harlaftis classification.^9,10

The case presented here most likely represents either a Y-shaped type 1 primordial gallbladder or a type 2 accessory gallbladder based on historical data and intraoperative cholangiogram findings at the time of repeat cholecystectomy. Gallbladder duplication is clinically indistinguishable from regular gallbladder pathology preoperatively and can only be identified on imaging or intraoperatively.¹¹ Prior case reports and studies have found that it is frequently missed on preoperative abdominal ultrasonography and CT in up to 50% of cases.^12-14

The differential diagnosis of gallbladder duplication seen on preoperative imaging includes a gallbladder diverticulum, choledochal cyst, focal adenonomyomatosis, Phrygian cap, or folded gallbladder.^1,2 Historically, the most definitive test for gallbladder duplication has been either intraoperative cholangiography, which can also clarify biliary anatomy, or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with cholangiography.^1,3 The debate over routine use of intraoperative cholangiography has been ongoing for the past several decades.¹⁵ Though intraoperative cholangiogram remains one of the most definitive tests for gallbladder duplication, given the overall low incidence of this variant, recommendation for routine intraoperative cholangiography solely to rule out gallbladder duplication cannot be definitively recommended based on our review of the literature. Currently, preoperative MRCP is the study of choice when there is concern from historical facts or from other imaging of gallbladder duplication as it is noninvasive and has a high degree of detail, particularly with 3D reconstructions.^14,16 At the time of surgery, the most critical step to avoid inadvertent ductal injury is clear visualization of ductal anatomy and obtaining the critical view of safety.¹⁷ Though this will also assist in identifying some cases of gallbladder duplication, given the great variation of duplication, it will not prevent missing some variants. In our case, extensive local scarring from the patient’s prior antrectomy and vagotomy along with lack of the use of intraoperative cholangiography likely contributed to missing his duplication at the time of his index cholecystectomy.

Undiagnosed gallbladder duplication can lead to additional morbidity related to common entities associated with gallbladder pathology, such as biliary colic, cholecystitis, cholangitis, and pancreatitis. Additionally, case reports in the literature have documented more rare associations, such as empyema, carcinoma, cholecystoenteric fistula, and torsion, all associated with a duplicated gallbladder.^18-21 Once identified pre- or intraoperatively, it is generally recommended that all gallbladders be removed in symptomatic patients and that intraoperative cholangiography be done to assure complete resection of the duplicated gallbladders and to avoid injury to the biliary trees.^22-25

Conclusions

Gallbladder duplication and other congenital biliary anatomic variations should be considered before a biliary operation and included in the differential diagnosis when evaluating patients who have clinical symptoms consistent with biliary pathology. In addition, intraoperative cholangiogram should be performed during cholecystectomy if the inferior liver edge cannot be visualized well, as in the case of this patient where a prior foregut operation resulted in extensive adhesive disease. Intraoperative cholangiogram also should be considered in patients whose preoperative imaging does not visualize the right upper quadrant well due to patient habitus. Doing so may identify gallbladder duplication and allow for complete cholecystectomy as well as proper identification and management of cystic duct variants. Awareness and consideration of duplicated biliary variants can help prevent intraoperative complications related to biliary anomalies and avoid the morbidity related to recurrent biliary disease and the need for repeat operative procedures.

Acknowledgments

We extend our thanks to Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Healthcare System and the Departments of Surgery and Radiology for their support of this case report, and Lorrie Langdale, MD, and Roger Tatum, MD, for their mentorship of this project

This patient's clinical presentation and laboratory findings are consistent with a diagnosis of Crohn disease.

Crohn disease is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease that is becoming increasingly prevalent worldwide. It is estimated to affect three to 20 persons per 100,000. When not effectively managed, Crohn disease is associated with substantial morbidity and significant impairments in lifestyle and daily activities during flares and remissions. It is characterized by a transmural granulomatous inflammation that can affect any part of the gastrointestinal tract — usually, the ileum, colon, or both. 

Abdominal pain, diarrhea, weight loss, and fatigue are often prominent symptoms in patients with Crohn disease. Crampy or steady right lower quadrant or periumbilical pain may develop; the pain both precedes and may be partially relieved by defecation. Diarrhea is frequently intermittent and is not usually grossly bloody. Diffuse abdominal pain accompanied by mucus, blood, and pus in the stool may be reported by patients if the colon is involved. Involvement of the small intestine usually presents with evidence of malabsorption, including diarrhea, abdominal pain, weight loss, and anorexia, which may be subtle early in the disease course. Anorexia, nausea, and vomiting are more common in patients with gastroduodenal involvement, whereas debilitating perirectal pain, malodorous discharge from a fistula, and disfiguring scars from active disease or previous surgery may be present in patients with perianal disease. Patients may also present with symptoms suggestive of intestinal obstruction, or with anemia, recurrent fistulas, or fever. 

As stated in guidelines from the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), multiple streams of information, including history and physical examination, laboratory tests, endoscopy results, pathology findings, and radiographic tests, must be incorporated to arrive at a clinical diagnosis of Crohn disease. In most cases, the presence of chronic intestinal inflammation solidifies a diagnosis of Crohn disease. However, it can be challenging to differentiate Crohn disease from ulcerative colitis, particularly when the inflammation is confined to the colon. Bleeding is much more common in ulcerative colitis than in Crohn disease, whereas intestinal obstruction is common in Crohn disease and uncommon in ulcerative colitis. Fistulae and perianal disease are common in Crohn disease but are absent or rare in ulcerative colitis. Moreover, weight loss is typical in patients with Crohn disease but is uncommon in ulcerative colitis.

Additional diagnostic clues for Crohn disease include discontinuous involvement with skip areas; sparing of the rectum; deep, linear, or serpiginous ulcers of the colon; strictures; fistulas; or granulomatous inflammation. Only a small percentage of patients have granulomas on biopsy. The presence of ileitis in a patient with extensive colitis (ie, backwash ileitis) can also make determining the inflammatory bowel disease subtype challenging.

Arthropathy (both axial and peripheral) is a classic extraintestinal manifestation of Crohn disease, as are dermatologic manifestations (including pyoderma gangrenosum and erythema nodosum); ocular manifestations (including uveitis, scleritis, and episcleritis); and hepatobiliary disease (ie, primary sclerosing cholangitis). Less common extraintestinal complications of Crohn disease include:

•    Thromboembolism (both venous and arterial)
•    Metabolic bone diseases
•    Osteonecrosis
•    Cholelithiasis
•    Nephrolithiasis. 

Only 20%-30% of patients with Crohn disease will have a nonprogressive or indolent course. Clinical features that are associated with a high risk for progressive disease burden include young age at diagnosis, initial extensive bowel involvement, ileal or ileocolonic involvement, perianal or severe rectal disease, and a penetrating or stenosis disease phenotype. 

According to the AGA's Clinical Care Pathway for Crohn Disease, clinical laboratory testing in a patient with symptoms of Crohn disease should include:

•    Complete blood cell count (anemia and leukocytosis are the most common abnormalities seen)
•    C-reactive protein (not a specific marker, but may correlate with disease activity in a subset of patients)
•    Comprehensive metabolic panel
•    Fecal calprotectin (may correlate with intestinal inflammation; can help distinguish inflammatory bowel disorders from irritable bowel syndrome)
•    Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (may be elevated in some patients; not a specific marker)

Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies should be performed in the evaluation of patients with suspected Crohn disease, and disease distribution and severity should be documented at the time of diagnosis. Biopsies of uninvolved mucosa are recommended to identify the extent of histologic disease.

Consult the AGA guidelines for more extensive details on the workup for Crohn disease, including indications for additional imaging and phenotypic classification. 

In recent years, outcomes in Crohn disease have improved, which is probably the result of earlier diagnosis, increasing use of biologics, escalation or alteration of therapy based on disease severity, and endoscopic management of colorectal cancer. As noted above, Crohn disease includes multiple phenotypes, characterized by the Montreal Classification as stricturing, penetrating, inflammatory (nonstricturing and nonpenetrating), and perianal disease. Each of these phenotypes can present with a range in severity from mild to severe disease. 

In general, therapeutic recommendations for patients are based on disease location, disease severity, disease-associated complications, and future disease prognosis and are individualized according to the symptomatic response and tolerance. Current therapeutic approaches should be considered a sequential continuum to treat acute disease or induce clinical remission, then maintain response or remission. Pharmacologic options include antidiarrheal agents, anti-inflammatory therapies (eg, sulfasalazine, mesalamine), corticosteroids (a short course for severe disease), biologic therapies (eg, infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, natalizumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab), and occasionally immunosuppressive agents (tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil). In addition to their 2014 guidelines on the management of Crohn disease in adults, the AGA recently released guidelines specific to the medical management of moderate to severe luminal and fistulizing Crohn disease.

Bhupinder S. Anand, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX

Bhupinder S. Anand, MD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships

This patient's clinical presentation and laboratory findings are consistent with a diagnosis of Crohn disease.

Crohn disease is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease that is becoming increasingly prevalent worldwide. It is estimated to affect three to 20 persons per 100,000. When not effectively managed, Crohn disease is associated with substantial morbidity and significant impairments in lifestyle and daily activities during flares and remissions. It is characterized by a transmural granulomatous inflammation that can affect any part of the gastrointestinal tract — usually, the ileum, colon, or both. 

Abdominal pain, diarrhea, weight loss, and fatigue are often prominent symptoms in patients with Crohn disease. Crampy or steady right lower quadrant or periumbilical pain may develop; the pain both precedes and may be partially relieved by defecation. Diarrhea is frequently intermittent and is not usually grossly bloody. Diffuse abdominal pain accompanied by mucus, blood, and pus in the stool may be reported by patients if the colon is involved. Involvement of the small intestine usually presents with evidence of malabsorption, including diarrhea, abdominal pain, weight loss, and anorexia, which may be subtle early in the disease course. Anorexia, nausea, and vomiting are more common in patients with gastroduodenal involvement, whereas debilitating perirectal pain, malodorous discharge from a fistula, and disfiguring scars from active disease or previous surgery may be present in patients with perianal disease. Patients may also present with symptoms suggestive of intestinal obstruction, or with anemia, recurrent fistulas, or fever. 

As stated in guidelines from the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), multiple streams of information, including history and physical examination, laboratory tests, endoscopy results, pathology findings, and radiographic tests, must be incorporated to arrive at a clinical diagnosis of Crohn disease. In most cases, the presence of chronic intestinal inflammation solidifies a diagnosis of Crohn disease. However, it can be challenging to differentiate Crohn disease from ulcerative colitis, particularly when the inflammation is confined to the colon. Bleeding is much more common in ulcerative colitis than in Crohn disease, whereas intestinal obstruction is common in Crohn disease and uncommon in ulcerative colitis. Fistulae and perianal disease are common in Crohn disease but are absent or rare in ulcerative colitis. Moreover, weight loss is typical in patients with Crohn disease but is uncommon in ulcerative colitis.

Additional diagnostic clues for Crohn disease include discontinuous involvement with skip areas; sparing of the rectum; deep, linear, or serpiginous ulcers of the colon; strictures; fistulas; or granulomatous inflammation. Only a small percentage of patients have granulomas on biopsy. The presence of ileitis in a patient with extensive colitis (ie, backwash ileitis) can also make determining the inflammatory bowel disease subtype challenging.

Arthropathy (both axial and peripheral) is a classic extraintestinal manifestation of Crohn disease, as are dermatologic manifestations (including pyoderma gangrenosum and erythema nodosum); ocular manifestations (including uveitis, scleritis, and episcleritis); and hepatobiliary disease (ie, primary sclerosing cholangitis). Less common extraintestinal complications of Crohn disease include:

•    Thromboembolism (both venous and arterial)
•    Metabolic bone diseases
•    Osteonecrosis
•    Cholelithiasis
•    Nephrolithiasis. 

Only 20%-30% of patients with Crohn disease will have a nonprogressive or indolent course. Clinical features that are associated with a high risk for progressive disease burden include young age at diagnosis, initial extensive bowel involvement, ileal or ileocolonic involvement, perianal or severe rectal disease, and a penetrating or stenosis disease phenotype. 

According to the AGA's Clinical Care Pathway for Crohn Disease, clinical laboratory testing in a patient with symptoms of Crohn disease should include:

•    Complete blood cell count (anemia and leukocytosis are the most common abnormalities seen)
•    C-reactive protein (not a specific marker, but may correlate with disease activity in a subset of patients)
•    Comprehensive metabolic panel
•    Fecal calprotectin (may correlate with intestinal inflammation; can help distinguish inflammatory bowel disorders from irritable bowel syndrome)
•    Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (may be elevated in some patients; not a specific marker)

Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies should be performed in the evaluation of patients with suspected Crohn disease, and disease distribution and severity should be documented at the time of diagnosis. Biopsies of uninvolved mucosa are recommended to identify the extent of histologic disease.

Consult the AGA guidelines for more extensive details on the workup for Crohn disease, including indications for additional imaging and phenotypic classification. 

In recent years, outcomes in Crohn disease have improved, which is probably the result of earlier diagnosis, increasing use of biologics, escalation or alteration of therapy based on disease severity, and endoscopic management of colorectal cancer. As noted above, Crohn disease includes multiple phenotypes, characterized by the Montreal Classification as stricturing, penetrating, inflammatory (nonstricturing and nonpenetrating), and perianal disease. Each of these phenotypes can present with a range in severity from mild to severe disease. 

In general, therapeutic recommendations for patients are based on disease location, disease severity, disease-associated complications, and future disease prognosis and are individualized according to the symptomatic response and tolerance. Current therapeutic approaches should be considered a sequential continuum to treat acute disease or induce clinical remission, then maintain response or remission. Pharmacologic options include antidiarrheal agents, anti-inflammatory therapies (eg, sulfasalazine, mesalamine), corticosteroids (a short course for severe disease), biologic therapies (eg, infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, natalizumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab), and occasionally immunosuppressive agents (tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil). In addition to their 2014 guidelines on the management of Crohn disease in adults, the AGA recently released guidelines specific to the medical management of moderate to severe luminal and fistulizing Crohn disease.

Bhupinder S. Anand, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX

Bhupinder S. Anand, MD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships

This patient's clinical presentation and laboratory findings are consistent with a diagnosis of Crohn disease.

Crohn disease is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease that is becoming increasingly prevalent worldwide. It is estimated to affect three to 20 persons per 100,000. When not effectively managed, Crohn disease is associated with substantial morbidity and significant impairments in lifestyle and daily activities during flares and remissions. It is characterized by a transmural granulomatous inflammation that can affect any part of the gastrointestinal tract — usually, the ileum, colon, or both. 

Abdominal pain, diarrhea, weight loss, and fatigue are often prominent symptoms in patients with Crohn disease. Crampy or steady right lower quadrant or periumbilical pain may develop; the pain both precedes and may be partially relieved by defecation. Diarrhea is frequently intermittent and is not usually grossly bloody. Diffuse abdominal pain accompanied by mucus, blood, and pus in the stool may be reported by patients if the colon is involved. Involvement of the small intestine usually presents with evidence of malabsorption, including diarrhea, abdominal pain, weight loss, and anorexia, which may be subtle early in the disease course. Anorexia, nausea, and vomiting are more common in patients with gastroduodenal involvement, whereas debilitating perirectal pain, malodorous discharge from a fistula, and disfiguring scars from active disease or previous surgery may be present in patients with perianal disease. Patients may also present with symptoms suggestive of intestinal obstruction, or with anemia, recurrent fistulas, or fever. 

As stated in guidelines from the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), multiple streams of information, including history and physical examination, laboratory tests, endoscopy results, pathology findings, and radiographic tests, must be incorporated to arrive at a clinical diagnosis of Crohn disease. In most cases, the presence of chronic intestinal inflammation solidifies a diagnosis of Crohn disease. However, it can be challenging to differentiate Crohn disease from ulcerative colitis, particularly when the inflammation is confined to the colon. Bleeding is much more common in ulcerative colitis than in Crohn disease, whereas intestinal obstruction is common in Crohn disease and uncommon in ulcerative colitis. Fistulae and perianal disease are common in Crohn disease but are absent or rare in ulcerative colitis. Moreover, weight loss is typical in patients with Crohn disease but is uncommon in ulcerative colitis.

Additional diagnostic clues for Crohn disease include discontinuous involvement with skip areas; sparing of the rectum; deep, linear, or serpiginous ulcers of the colon; strictures; fistulas; or granulomatous inflammation. Only a small percentage of patients have granulomas on biopsy. The presence of ileitis in a patient with extensive colitis (ie, backwash ileitis) can also make determining the inflammatory bowel disease subtype challenging.

Arthropathy (both axial and peripheral) is a classic extraintestinal manifestation of Crohn disease, as are dermatologic manifestations (including pyoderma gangrenosum and erythema nodosum); ocular manifestations (including uveitis, scleritis, and episcleritis); and hepatobiliary disease (ie, primary sclerosing cholangitis). Less common extraintestinal complications of Crohn disease include:

•    Thromboembolism (both venous and arterial)
•    Metabolic bone diseases
•    Osteonecrosis
•    Cholelithiasis
•    Nephrolithiasis. 

Only 20%-30% of patients with Crohn disease will have a nonprogressive or indolent course. Clinical features that are associated with a high risk for progressive disease burden include young age at diagnosis, initial extensive bowel involvement, ileal or ileocolonic involvement, perianal or severe rectal disease, and a penetrating or stenosis disease phenotype. 

According to the AGA's Clinical Care Pathway for Crohn Disease, clinical laboratory testing in a patient with symptoms of Crohn disease should include:

•    Complete blood cell count (anemia and leukocytosis are the most common abnormalities seen)
•    C-reactive protein (not a specific marker, but may correlate with disease activity in a subset of patients)
•    Comprehensive metabolic panel
•    Fecal calprotectin (may correlate with intestinal inflammation; can help distinguish inflammatory bowel disorders from irritable bowel syndrome)
•    Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (may be elevated in some patients; not a specific marker)

Ileocolonoscopy with biopsies should be performed in the evaluation of patients with suspected Crohn disease, and disease distribution and severity should be documented at the time of diagnosis. Biopsies of uninvolved mucosa are recommended to identify the extent of histologic disease.

Consult the AGA guidelines for more extensive details on the workup for Crohn disease, including indications for additional imaging and phenotypic classification. 

In recent years, outcomes in Crohn disease have improved, which is probably the result of earlier diagnosis, increasing use of biologics, escalation or alteration of therapy based on disease severity, and endoscopic management of colorectal cancer. As noted above, Crohn disease includes multiple phenotypes, characterized by the Montreal Classification as stricturing, penetrating, inflammatory (nonstricturing and nonpenetrating), and perianal disease. Each of these phenotypes can present with a range in severity from mild to severe disease. 

In general, therapeutic recommendations for patients are based on disease location, disease severity, disease-associated complications, and future disease prognosis and are individualized according to the symptomatic response and tolerance. Current therapeutic approaches should be considered a sequential continuum to treat acute disease or induce clinical remission, then maintain response or remission. Pharmacologic options include antidiarrheal agents, anti-inflammatory therapies (eg, sulfasalazine, mesalamine), corticosteroids (a short course for severe disease), biologic therapies (eg, infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, natalizumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab), and occasionally immunosuppressive agents (tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil). In addition to their 2014 guidelines on the management of Crohn disease in adults, the AGA recently released guidelines specific to the medical management of moderate to severe luminal and fistulizing Crohn disease.

Bhupinder S. Anand, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX

Bhupinder S. Anand, MD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships