Atypical presentations of Phaeochromocytoma – a clinical case report

Authors

  • Jorge Ruivo Serviço de Medicina 1-A do Hospital de Santa Maria, Lisboa
  • Ana Tomada Serviço de Medicina 1-A do Hospital de Santa Maria, Lisboa
  • Paula Alcântara Serviço de Medicina 1-A do Hospital de Santa Maria, Lisboa

Keywords:

phaeochromocytoma, atypical, necrosis, malignancy, non-secreting

Abstract

Introduction: Phaeochromocytoma is a rare neuroendocrine
tumour. The biochemical and clinical features derive mainly from
excessive catecholamine production. When there is mass necrosis,
these tumours may reveal themselves through a huge release of
hormones. We present the case of a 42 year old female attending
a Hypertension outpatient clinic because of fainting episodes and
high blood pressure. She was diagnosed with hypertension at the
age of 18 years and was being treated for severe depression.
She had no complaints until 3 months earlier when she started
suffering from “hard-to-assess” episodes of fatigue, trembling,
headache, blurred vision and faintness. SBP was 160-200
mmHg. She had a slow psychomotor response and reduced facial expression.
She presented with inconsistently elevated urinary metanephrines and CT scan showed a 3.4 cm mass, with a necrotic center,
in her left adrenal gland. Phaeochromocytoma was confirmed with
an IMBG scintigraphy. She underwent laparoscopic removal of the
mass and histology revealed phaeochromocytoma.
Discussion: A diagnosis of Phaeochromocytoma is hard to
make because of a number of factors: the rising number of
incidentalomas; the technical difficulty in combining biochemical
and imaging exams; numerous drug interactions with biochemical
results as well as a lack of clinical suspicion when facing unusual
presenting features, such as hypotension. Tumour necrosis is
usually associated with devastating clinical presentations, which
were not present in this patient.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Jane L Harding, Michael W Yeh, Bruce G Robinson, Leigh W Delbridge, Stan B Sidhu. Potential pitfalls in the diagnosis of phaeochromocytoma, Med J Austral 2005; 182: 637-639.

Alderazi Y, Yeh M, Robinson B, Benn D, Sywak M et al. Phaechromocytoma: current concepts, Med J Austral 2005; 183:201-204.

Lenders J, Eisenhofer G, Mannelli M, Pacak K. Phaechromocytoma, The Lancet 2005; 336:665-672.

Graeme E, Stefen R Bornstein, et al. Malignant pheocromocytoma: current status and initiatives for future progress, Endocrine-Related Cancer, 2004; 11: 423-436.

Tátic S et al. - Pheochromocytoma – pathohistologic and immunohistochemical aspects, Srp Arh Celol Lek 2002; 130( 2):7-13.

Nawar R, Aron D. Adrenal Incidentalomas – a continuing management dilemma, Endocrine-Related Cancer, 2005; 12: 585-598.

Erwin Van der Harst et al. [123I] Metaiodobenzylguanidine and [111In] Octreotide uptake in benign and Malignant Pheochromocytomas, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2000;86(2): 685-693 .

False negative MIBG examinations may be expected in cases PHEO tumors that have undergone necrosis. Ioannis Ilias, Karel Pacak, Current Approaches and Recommended Algorithm for the Diagnostic Localization of PheochromocytomaClin Endocrinol Metab, February 2004, 89(2):479–491

Lenders J, Pacak K,Walther M, Linehan M, Friberg P, Keiser H, Goldstein D, Eisenhofer G. Biochemical diagnosis of pheochromocytoma, which test is the best?, JAMA, 2002; 287: 1427-1434.

Handler J. Is it a pheochromocytoma? J Clin hypertens 2007; 9: 293-296.

Pacak K, LinehanWM,Eisenhofer G, WaltherMM, Goldstein DS. Recent advances in genetics, diagnosis, localization, and treatment of pheochromocytoma. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134:315–329

Additional Files

Published

2008-12-31

How to Cite

1.
Ruivo J, Tomada A, Alcântara P. Atypical presentations of Phaeochromocytoma – a clinical case report. RPMI [Internet]. 2008 Dec. 31 [cited 2024 May 18];15(4):268-71. Available from: https://revista.spmi.pt/index.php/rpmi/article/view/1494

Most read articles by the same author(s)