Clinical Dilemma in the Treatment of a Patient with Microangiopathic Haemolytic Anaemia, Thrombocytopaenia and Severe Hypertension

While haemolytic uraemic syndrome in children is predominantly associated with Shiga toxin -producing Escherichia coli (typically 0157:H7), some cases occur without associated diarrhoea, or as the manifestation of an underlying disorder other than infection. Haemolytic uraemic syndrome is characterised by microangiopathic anaemia, thrombocytopaenia and renal failure, on occasion accompanied by severe hypertension. Malignant hypertension is a syndrome that sometimes exhibits the same laboratory abnormalities as haemolytic uraemic syndrome as it may share the same pathological findings: thrombotic microangiopathy. As clinical features of both entities overlap, the distinction between them can be very difficult. However, differentiation is essential for the treatment decision, since early plasma exchange dramatically reduces mortality in haemolytic uraemic syndrome not associated with diarrhoea. An increasing number of genetic causes of this pathology have been described and may be very useful in differentiating it from thrombotic microangiopathy due to other aetiologies. Despite advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology of haemolytic uraemic syndrome not associated with diarrhoea, the management often remains empirical. We describe a patient with simultaneous microangiopathic haemolytic anaemia, thrombocytopaenia and severe hypertension managed in the acute period of illness with plasma exchange.

Ovarian Borderline Tumor and Fertility-Sparing Surgery

Ovarian borderline tumors (OBTs) are frequently diagnosed in women of reproductive age. There is no consensus about their management, and it sometimes represents a dilemma aboutwhat should be done: fertility sparing surgery or a hysterectomy with salpingo-oophorectomy? Case: A 32-year-old nulligravida, diagnosed with a right ovarian borderline tumor is presented. She underwent pelvic washings, right salpingo-oophorectomy, appendectomy, and omental and peritoneal biopsies (laparotomic approach). Macroscopically, the left ovary was normal and subsequent exploration for staging was also normal, including the lymph nodes. Intraoperatively, frozen section examination was unclear, suggesting an OBT. Results: The final histopathologic diagnosis was ovarian borderline tumor, stage IIC (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] staging). The patient expressed a desire to preserve her fertility. Thirty-six months postsurgery, she became pregnant spontaneously and delivered a healthy newborn at term. Conclusions: Conservative surgery can be performed in young patients treated for an OBT, provided they are closely followed up and that this surgery is performed after careful consideration and informed consent. It is, however, controversial with respect to performing hysterectomy and salpingo-oopherectomy upon the patient’s completion of childbearing.