A 71-year-old asbestos-exposed male with symptoms suggestive of asbestosis for the previous 8 years presented with abdominal distension and ascites. Clinically, a diagnosis of mesothelioma carcinoma was made. Light microscopy of an omental biopsy failed to advance the diagnosis: The tumor was a solid, papillary, and glandular neoplasm lacking mucin and hyaluronidase-sensitive Alcian blue staining material. Immunohistochemistry gave positive results for Ber-EP4, LeuM1, and CEA, markers, favoring carcinoma. Electron microscopy revealed processes in channels and lumina, which were long, slender, and uncoated with a length: diameter ratio of 19.7. A few possessed small rootlets. A glycocalyx and glycocalyceal bodies were not seen. Other features included tonofibrils, a basal lamina, and desmosomes. The patient died 3 months following the onset of abdominal symptoms. Autopsy findings included solid and papillary tumor throughout the peritoneum, but no intrinsic tumor of the gastrointestinal tract or elsewhere. Arriving at a final diagnosis was complicated by immunohistochemistry, which favored carcinoma, and ultrastructure, which suggested mesothelioma. Taking into account all lines of evidence, it was concluded that the tumor was probably a mesothelioma but one with some features developed to an extent more typical of carcinoma.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eyden et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: