RESUMEN
El megaprepucio congénito es una patología urológica propia dela infancia que puede ser fácilmente confundida con otras entidadesclínicas como la fimosis fisiológica o el pene enterrado. Debido al riesgode complicaciones asociadas, principalmente de carácter infeccioso uobstructivo con afectación del tracto urinario superior, es importanteincidir en su correcto diagnóstico de cara a ofertar un tratamiento precoz.Presentamos tres casos de megaprepucio congénito, diagnosticados eintervenidos en nuestro servicio durante el periodo comprendido entreenero de 2019 y mayo de 2020, describiéndose el diagnóstico, la tera-péutica empleada y la evolución clínica.
Congenital megaprepuce is a urological pathology typical ofchildhood. It can be easily mistaken for other clinical entities such asphysiological phimosis or buried penis. Owing to the risk of associ-ated complications primarily infectious and obstructive complications,with upper urinary tract involvement , achieving an accurate diagnosisproves particularly significant for early treatment initiation. We presentthree cases of congenital megaprepuce diagnosed and operated on atour department from January 2019 to May 2020. Diagnosis, therapy,and clinical progression are described.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Preescolar , Fimosis/cirugía , Pene , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Prepucio , Prepucio/cirugía , Circuncisión Masculina , Pediatría , Cirugía General , Enfermedades Urogenitales MasculinasRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Diagnosis of severe hepatitis C recurrence is based on analytical and histological criteria but there is little information about their correlation. AIM: To assess the accuracy of laboratory criteria for the diagnosis of fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data form HCV positive patients who underwent liver transplantation (LT) between 2000 and 2014 in two European university hospitals. Patients were classified according to laboratory criteria such as FCH, cholestatic hepatitis (CH) and non-cholestatic acute hepatitis (NCAH). Histological characteristics were also evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy patients with acute HCV recurrence within the first year after LT with an available liver biopsy were included in the study. Most patients were male (70%) with a median age of 58 years (50-64) and infected with genotype 1b (71.4%). Median time from LT to diagnosis of recurrence was 2.96 months (2.1-5.3). Thirty-nine patients were classified as FCH, 21 as CH and 10 as NCAH. Marked hepatocyte ballooning and ductular reaction were associated with the presence of FCH with an OR of 4.66 (p=0.047) and 20.58 (p=0.025), respectively. Considering liver biopsy as the gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the analytical criteria were 0.8, 0.5, 0.3 and 0.9, respectively. However, correlation between histological and analytical criteria was poor (k=0.033). DISCUSSION: Analytical criteria may be used to rule out the presence of FCH, but a biopsy is mandatory to confirm the diagnosis. Ductular reaction and hepatocyte ballooning were independent predictors of FCH.