Clinical Controversy Surrounding the Differential Diagnosis of Branchiogenic Carcinoma

Clinical evaluation, differential diagnosis, and management of a neck mass constitute commonly encountered problems for the head and neck surgeon. An asymptomatic neck mass in adults may be the only clinical sign of head and neck cancer. A 50-year-old female patient presented with a painless, slowly...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Alexander Karatzanis, Kleanthi Mylopotamitaki, Eleni Lagoudaki, Emmanuel Prokopakis, Sofia Agelaki
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2022-01-01
Series:Case Reports in Otolaryngology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4582262
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832548832838156288
author Alexander Karatzanis
Kleanthi Mylopotamitaki
Eleni Lagoudaki
Emmanuel Prokopakis
Sofia Agelaki
author_facet Alexander Karatzanis
Kleanthi Mylopotamitaki
Eleni Lagoudaki
Emmanuel Prokopakis
Sofia Agelaki
author_sort Alexander Karatzanis
collection DOAJ
description Clinical evaluation, differential diagnosis, and management of a neck mass constitute commonly encountered problems for the head and neck surgeon. An asymptomatic neck mass in adults may be the only clinical sign of head and neck cancer. A 50-year-old female patient presented with a painless, slowly enlarging, left lateral neck lump. Ultrasonography described a possible lymph node with cystic degeneration, and fine needle aspiration biopsy only detected atypical cells of squamous epithelium. An open biopsy under general anesthesia was performed. Histopathological findings suggested the diagnosis of lymph node infiltration by squamous cell carcinoma of an unknown primary site, but differential diagnosis also included branchiogenic carcinoma arising in a branchial cleft cyst. A diagnostic algorithm for metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of an unknown primary site was followed, including positron emission tomography with computed tomography. The patient underwent panendoscopy and bilateral tonsillectomy, and an ipsilateral p16 positive tonsillar squamous cell carcinoma was detected. Further appropriate management followed. The existence of true branchiogenic carcinoma is controversial. When such a diagnosis is contemplated, every effort should be made to detect a possible primary site. Branchiogenic carcinoma, if exists at all, remains a diagnosis of exclusion.
format Article
id doaj-art-91f4b94152ec486695945c02a2ff4283
institution Kabale University
issn 2090-6773
language English
publishDate 2022-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Case Reports in Otolaryngology
spelling doaj-art-91f4b94152ec486695945c02a2ff42832025-02-03T06:13:00ZengWileyCase Reports in Otolaryngology2090-67732022-01-01202210.1155/2022/4582262Clinical Controversy Surrounding the Differential Diagnosis of Branchiogenic CarcinomaAlexander Karatzanis0Kleanthi Mylopotamitaki1Eleni Lagoudaki2Emmanuel Prokopakis3Sofia Agelaki4Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck SurgeryDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck SurgeryDepartment of PathologyDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck SurgeryDepartment of Medical OncologyClinical evaluation, differential diagnosis, and management of a neck mass constitute commonly encountered problems for the head and neck surgeon. An asymptomatic neck mass in adults may be the only clinical sign of head and neck cancer. A 50-year-old female patient presented with a painless, slowly enlarging, left lateral neck lump. Ultrasonography described a possible lymph node with cystic degeneration, and fine needle aspiration biopsy only detected atypical cells of squamous epithelium. An open biopsy under general anesthesia was performed. Histopathological findings suggested the diagnosis of lymph node infiltration by squamous cell carcinoma of an unknown primary site, but differential diagnosis also included branchiogenic carcinoma arising in a branchial cleft cyst. A diagnostic algorithm for metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of an unknown primary site was followed, including positron emission tomography with computed tomography. The patient underwent panendoscopy and bilateral tonsillectomy, and an ipsilateral p16 positive tonsillar squamous cell carcinoma was detected. Further appropriate management followed. The existence of true branchiogenic carcinoma is controversial. When such a diagnosis is contemplated, every effort should be made to detect a possible primary site. Branchiogenic carcinoma, if exists at all, remains a diagnosis of exclusion.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4582262
spellingShingle Alexander Karatzanis
Kleanthi Mylopotamitaki
Eleni Lagoudaki
Emmanuel Prokopakis
Sofia Agelaki
Clinical Controversy Surrounding the Differential Diagnosis of Branchiogenic Carcinoma
Case Reports in Otolaryngology
title Clinical Controversy Surrounding the Differential Diagnosis of Branchiogenic Carcinoma
title_full Clinical Controversy Surrounding the Differential Diagnosis of Branchiogenic Carcinoma
title_fullStr Clinical Controversy Surrounding the Differential Diagnosis of Branchiogenic Carcinoma
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Controversy Surrounding the Differential Diagnosis of Branchiogenic Carcinoma
title_short Clinical Controversy Surrounding the Differential Diagnosis of Branchiogenic Carcinoma
title_sort clinical controversy surrounding the differential diagnosis of branchiogenic carcinoma
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/4582262
work_keys_str_mv AT alexanderkaratzanis clinicalcontroversysurroundingthedifferentialdiagnosisofbranchiogeniccarcinoma
AT kleanthimylopotamitaki clinicalcontroversysurroundingthedifferentialdiagnosisofbranchiogeniccarcinoma
AT elenilagoudaki clinicalcontroversysurroundingthedifferentialdiagnosisofbranchiogeniccarcinoma
AT emmanuelprokopakis clinicalcontroversysurroundingthedifferentialdiagnosisofbranchiogeniccarcinoma
AT sofiaagelaki clinicalcontroversysurroundingthedifferentialdiagnosisofbranchiogeniccarcinoma