PMC9372704_01
Electrocardiogram suggested mild ST-segment elevation in leads the caVL, reciprocal ST depressions in V4-V6.
j_med-2022-0535-fig001.jpg
PMC9372704_01_j_med-2022-0535-fig001.jpg
j_med-2022-0535_fig_001
The electrocardiogram suggested mild ST-segment elevation in leads I and aVL, reciprocal ST depressions in V4-V6 (Figure 1).
TTE. No motion in the basal and mid segments of the left ventricle but preserved apical wall motion ((a) in systole and (b) in diastole).
j_med-2022-0535-fig002.jpg
PMC9372704_01_j_med-2022-0535-fig002.jpg
j_med-2022-0535_fig_002
TTE revealed a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 10% with no motion in the basal and mid-segments of the left ventricle but preserved apical wall motion (Figure 2).
Contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen. (a) Noncontrast-enhanced CT scan revealed an isointense solid mass with a clear boundary adjacent to the abdominal aorta (red dashed circle); (b and c) arterial and venous phase enhancement scans with mild enhancement of the mass (red dashed circle); (d and e) multiplanar reconstructed sagittal and coronal views revealed the adjacent relationship between the mass and the surrounding structures (red dashed circle).
j_med-2022-0535-fig003.jpg
PMC9372704_01_j_med-2022-0535-fig003.jpg
j_med-2022-0535_fig_003
A subsequent abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomographic (CT) scan showed a 30 mm x 29 mm x 24 mm solid mass adjacent to the abdominal aorta that was isointense with clear boundaries and mild enhancement on an enhanced scan (Figure 3).
PET-CT scan revealed an isointense mass with a clear boundary near the abdominal aorta with mild uptake of the mass (red arrow).
j_med-2022-0535-fig004.jpg
PMC9372704_01_j_med-2022-0535-fig004.jpg
j_med-2022-0535_fig_004
A positron emission tomography computed tomography (PET-CT) scan suggested a retroperitoneal paraganglioma (Figure 4).
Histopathological findings and immunohistochemical staining. (a) Hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining (x40); (b) He staining (x100); (c) HE staining (x200); (d) immunostaining for vimentin (x100); (e) immunostaining for CK (x100); (f) immunostaining for Syn (x100).
j_med-2022-0535-fig005.jpg
PMC9372704_01_j_med-2022-0535-fig005.jpg
j_med-2022-0535_fig_005
Immunohistochemical staining showed that the tumor cells were positive for Vim, S100, Ki67 (2% positive), Syn and CgA, but negative for CK (Figure 5).