Israel Medical Association Journal

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a group of rare, heterogenous neoplasms that maintain unique morphologic and clinical features of neuroendocrine neoplasia and account for approximately 0.5% of all newly diagnosed malignancies. NETs are divided into two groups based on their histopathological morphology: well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). Well differentiated NETs are classified as G1, G2, or G3 based on their proliferation rate, whereas NECs are highly proliferative and poorly differentiated by definition [1]. Neuroendocrine neoplasms can occur almost anywhere in the body; however, they are most often seen in the gastrointestinal tract, pancreas, and lungs [2]. The extrahepatic bile duct is one of the rarest primary sites for NETs, accounting for 0.1% to 0.2% of NETs of the gastrointestinal tract [3]. Signet ring cell bile duct NETs are extremely uncommon and have no established incidence and prognosis due to their rarity. There is sparse information available regarding these tumors, and only a few cases have been reported in the literature to date. In this report, we presented the clinical course and surgical management of a 31-year-old female patient with a Klatskin signet ring cell NET.

Background: Plain abdominal radiographs are still performed as a first imaging examination to evaluate abdominal pain in the emergency department (ED), despite uncertainty regarding their utility.

Objectives: To describe the frequency and outcomes of the use of plain abdominal radiographs in the diagnosis of patients presenting with acute non-traumatic abdominal pain in the ED of a medical center. 

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients presenting to the ED with acute abdominal pain during a 6 month period. Further imaging (computed tomography, ultrasonography), when performed, was compared with the abdominal radiography. 

Results: Of 573 consecutive patients, 300 (52%) underwent abdominal radiography. Findings were normal in 88% (n=264), non-specific in 7.3% (n=22), and abnormal in 4.7% (n=14). For those with normal results, no further imaging was ordered for 43% (114/264). Of the 57% (150/264) who had follow-up imaging, 65% (98/150) showed abnormal findings. In 9 (3%) of the 300 patients, abdominal radiography identified bowel perforations and obstructions, and treatment was provided without the need for further radiologic examination.

Conclusions: The use of plain abdominal radiography is still common despite the high rate of false positive results. Efforts are needed to decrease the indiscriminate use of radiography in patients presenting with abdominal symptoms.