Case Reports

Histology is the gold standard for cirrhosis diagnosis. However, a combination of clinical history, physical examination findings, and supportive laboratory and radiographic features is generally sufficient to make the diagnosis. Routine ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) imaging often identifies a nodular liver contour with sequelae of portal hypertension, including splenomegaly, varices, and ascites, which can suggest cirrhosis when supported by laboratory parameters and clinical features. As a result, the diagnosis is typically made clinically.¹ Many patients with compensated cirrhosis go undetected. The presence of a decompensation event (ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, variceal hemorrhage, or hepatic encephalopathy) often leads to index diagnosis when patients were previously compensated. When a patient presents with suspected decompensated cirrhosis, it is important to consider other diagnoses with similar presentations and ensure that multiple disease processes are not contributing to the symptoms.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 64-year-old male with a history of intravenous (IV) methamphetamine use and prior incarceration presented with a 3-week history of progressively worsening generalized swelling. Prior to the onset of his symptoms, the patient injured his right lower extremity (RLE) in a bicycle accident, resulting in edema that progressed to bilateral lower extremity (BLE) edema and worsening fatigue, despite resolution of the initial injury. The patient gained weight though he could not quantify the amount. He experienced progressive hunger, thirst, and fatigue as well as increased sleep. Additionally, the patient experienced worsening dyspnea on exertion and orthopnea. He started using 2 pillows instead of 1 pillow at night.

The patient reported no fevers, chills, sputum production, chest pain, or paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea. He had no known history of sexually transmitted infections, no significant history of alcohol use, and occasional tobacco and marijuana use. He had been incarcerated > 10 years before and last used IV methamphetamine 3 years before. He did not regularly take any medications.

The patient’s vital signs included a temperature of 98.2 °F; 78/min heart rate; 15/min respiratory rate; 159/109 mm Hg blood pressure; and 98% oxygen saturation on room air. He had gained 20 lbs in the past 4 months. He had pitting edema in both legs and arms, as well as periorbital swelling, but no jugular venous distention, abnormal heart sounds, or murmurs. Breath sounds were distant but clear to auscultation. His abdomen was distended with normal bowel sounds and no fluid wave; mild epigastric tenderness was present, but no intra-abdominal masses were palpated. He had spider angiomata on the upper chest but no other stigmata of cirrhosis, such as caput medusae or jaundice. Tattoos were noted.

Laboratory test results showed a platelet count of 178 x 10³/μL (reference range, 140- 440 ~ 10³μL).Creatinine was 0.80 mg/dL (reference range, < 1.28 mg/dL), with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 99 mL/min/1.73 m² using the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology equation (reference range, > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), (reference range, > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), and Cystatin C was 1.14 mg/L (reference range, < 1.15 mg/L). His electrolytes and complete blood count were within normal limits, including sodium, 134 mmol/L; potassium, 4.4 mmol/L; chloride, 108 mmol/L; and carbon dioxide, 22.5 mmol/L.

Additional test results included alkaline phosphatase, 126 U/L (reference range, < 94 U/L); alanine transaminase, 41 U/L (reference range, < 45 U/L); aspartate aminotransferase, 70 U/L (reference range, < 35 U/L); total bilirubin, 0.6 mg/dL (reference range, < 1 mg/dL); albumin, 1.8 g/dL (reference range, 3.2-4.8 g/dL); and total protein, 6.3 g/dL (reference range, 5.9-8.3 g/dL). The patient’s international normalized ratio was 0.96 (reference range, 0.8-1.1), and brain natriuretic peptide was normal at 56 pg/mL. No prior laboratory results were available for comparison.

Urine toxicology was positive for amphetamines. Urinalysis demonstrated large occult blood, with a red blood cell count of 26/ HPF (reference range, 0/HPF) and proteinuria (100 mg/dL; reference range, negative), without bacteria, nitrites, or leukocyte esterase. Urine white blood cell count was 10/ HPF (reference range, 0/HPF), and fine granular casts and hyaline casts were present.

A noncontrast CT of the abdomen and pelvis in the emergency department showed an irregular liver contour with diffuse nodularity, multiple portosystemic collaterals, moderate abdominal and pelvic ascites, small bilateral pleural effusions with associated atelectasis, and anasarca consistent with cirrhosis (Figure 1). The patient was admitted to the internal medicine service for workup and management of newly diagnosed cirrhosis.

Paracentesis revealed straw-colored fluid with an ascitic fluid neutrophil count of 17/μL, a protein level of < 3 g/dL and albumin level of < 1.5 g/dL. Gram stain of the ascitic fluid showed a moderate white blood cell count with no organisms. Fluid culture showed no microbial growth.

Initial workup for cirrhosis demonstrated a positive total hepatitis A antibody. The patient had a nonreactive hepatitis B surface antigen and surface antibody, but a reactive hepatitis B core antibody; a hepatitis B DNA level was not ordered. He had a reactive hepatitis C antibody with a viral load of 4,490,000 II/mL (genotype 1a). The patient’s iron level was 120 μg/dL, with a calculated total iron-binding capacity (TIBC) of 126.2 μg/dL. His transferrin saturation (TSAT) (serum iron divided by TIBC) was 95%. The patient had nonreactive antinuclear antibody and antimitochondrial antibody tests and a positive antismooth muscle antibody test with a titer of 1:40. His α-fetoprotein (AFP) level was 505 ng/mL (reference range, < 8 ng/mL).

Follow-up MRI of the abdomen and pelvis showed cirrhotic morphology with large volume ascites and portosystemic collaterals, consistent with portal hypertension. Additionally, it showed multiple scattered peripheral sub centimeter hyperenhancing foci, most likely representing benign lesions.

The patient's spot urine protein-creatinine ratio was 3.76. To better quantify proteinuria, a 24-hour urine collection was performed and revealed 12.8 g/d of urine protein (reference range, 0-0.17 g/d). His serum triglyceride level was 175 mg/dL (reference range, 40-60 mg/dL); total cholesterol was 177 mg/ dL (reference range, ≤ 200 mg/dL); low density lipoprotein cholesterol was 98 mg/ dL (reference range, ≤ 130 mg/dL); and highdensity lipoprotein cholesterol was 43.8 mg/ dL (reference range, ≥ 40 mg/dL); C3 complement level was 71 mg/dL (reference range, 82-185 mg/dL); and C4 complement level was 22 mg/dL (reference range, 15-53 mg/ dL). His rheumatoid factor was < 14 IU/mL. Tests for rapid plasma reagin and HIV antigen- antibody were nonreactive, and the phospholipase A2 receptor antibody test was negative. The patient tested positive for QuantiFERON-TB Gold and qualitative cryoglobulin, which indicated a cryocrit of 1%.

A renal biopsy was performed, revealing diffuse podocyte foot process effacement and glomerulonephritis with low-grade C3 and immunoglobulin (Ig) G deposits, consistent with early membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (MPGN) (Figures 2 and 3).

The patient was initially diuresed with IV furosemide without significant urine output. He was then diuresed with IV 25% albumin (total, 25 g), followed by IV furosemide 40 mg twice daily, which led to significant urine output and resolution of his anasarca. Given the patient’s hypoalbuminemic state, IV albumin was necessary to deliver furosemide to the proximal tubule. He was started on lisinopril for renal protection and discharged with spironolactone and furosemide for fluid management in the context of cirrhosis.

The patient was evaluated by the Liver Nodule Clinic, which includes specialists from hepatology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, interventional radiology, and diagnostic radiology. The team considered the patient’s medical history and characteristics of the nodules on imaging. Notable aspects of the patient’s history included hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and an elevated AFP level, although imaging showed no lesion concerning for malignancy. Given these findings, the patient was scheduled for a liver biopsy to establish a tissue diagnosis of cirrhosis. Hepatology, nephrology, and infectious disease specialists coordinated to plan the management and treatment of latent tuberculosis (TB), chronic HCV, MPGN, compensated cirrhosis, and suspicious liver lesions.

The patient chose to handle management and treatment as an outpatient. He was discharged with furosemide and spironolactone for anasarca management, and amlodipine and lisinopril for his hypertension and MPGN. Follow-up appointments were scheduled with infectious disease for management of latent TB and HCV, nephrology for MPGN, gastroenterology for cirrhosis, and interventional radiology for liver biopsy. Unfortunately, the patient was unhoused with limited access to transportation, which prevented timely follow-up. Given these social factors, immunosuppression was not started. Additionally, he did not start on HCV therapy because the viral load was still pending at time of discharge.

DISCUSSION

The diagnosis of decompensated cirrhosis was prematurely established, resulting in a diagnostic delay, a form of diagnostic error. However, on hospital day 2, the initial hypothesis of decompensated cirrhosis as the sole driver of the patient’s presentation was reconsidered due to the disconnect between the severity of hypoalbuminemia and diffuse edema (anasarca), and the absence of laboratory evidence of hepatic decompensation (normal international normalized ratio, bilirubin, and low but normal platelet count). Although image findings supported cirrhosis, laboratory markers did not indicate hepatic decompensation. The severity of hypoalbuminemia and anasarca, along with an indeterminate Serum-Ascites Albumin Gradient, prompted the patient’s care team to consider other causes, specifically, nephrotic syndrome.

The patien’s spot protein-to-creatinine ratio was 3.76 (reference range < 0.2 mg/mg creatinine), but a 24-hour urine protein collection was 12.8 g/day (reference range < 150 mg/day). While most spot urine protein- to-creatinine ratios (UPCR) correlate with a 24-hour urine collection, discrepancies can occur, as in this case. It is important to recognize that the spot UPCR assumes that patients are excreting 1000 mg of creatinine daily in their urine, which is not always the case. In addition, changes in urine osmolality can lead to different values. The gold standard for proteinuria is a 24-hour urine collection for protein and creatinine.

The patient’s nephrotic-range proteinuria and severe hypoalbuminemia are not solely explained by cirrhosis. In addition, the patient’s lower extremity edema pointed to nephrotic syndrome. The differential diagnosis for nephrotic syndrome includes both primary and secondary forms of membranous nephropathy, minimal change disease, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, and MPGN, a histopathological diagnosis that requires distinguishing between immune complex-mediated and complement-mediated forms. Other causes of nephrotic syndrome that do not fit in any of these buckets include amyloidosis, IgA nephropathy, and diabetes mellitus (DM). Despite DM being a common cause of nephrotic range proteinuria, it rarely leads to full nephrotic syndrome.

When considering the diagnosis, we reframed the patient’s clinical syndrome as compensated cirrhosis plus nephrotic syndrome. This approach prioritized identifying a cause that could explain both cirrhosis (from any cause) leading to IgA nephropathy or injection drug use serving as a risk factor for cirrhosis and nephrotic syndrome through HCV or AA amyloidosis, respectively. This problem representation guided us to the correct diagnosis. There are multiple renal diseases associated with HCV infection, including MPGN, membranous nephropathy, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, and IgA nephropathy.² MPGN and mixed cryoglobulinemia are the most common. In the past, MPGN was classified as type I, II, and III.

The patient’s urine toxicology revealed recent amphetamine use, which can also lead to acute kidney injury through rhabdomyolysis or acute interstitial nephritis (AIN).³ In the cases of rhabdomyolysis, urinalysis would show positive heme without any red blood cell on microscopic analysis, which was not present in this case. AIN commonly manifests as acute kidney injury, pyuria, and proteinuria but without a decrease in complement levels.⁴ While the patient’s urine sediment included white blood cell (10/high-power field), the presence of microscopic hematuria, decreased complement levels, and proteinuria in the context of HCV positivity makes MPGN more likely than AIN.

Recently, there has been greater emphasis on using immunofluorescence for kidney biopsies. MPGN is now classified into 2 main categories: MPGN with mesangial immunoglobulins and C3 deposits in the capillary walls, and MPGN with C3 deposits but without Ig.⁵ MPGN with Ig-complement deposits is seen in autoimmune diseases and infections and is associated with dysproteinemias.

The renal biopsy in this patient was consistent with MPGN with immunofluorescence, a common finding in patients with infection. By synthesizing these data, we concluded that the patient represented a case of chronic HCV infection that led to MPGN with cryoglobulinemia. The normal C4 and negative RF do not suggest cryoglobulinemic crisis. Compensated cirrhosis was seen on imaging, pending liver biopsy.

Treatment

The management of MPGN secondary to HCV infection relies on the treatment of the underlying infection and clearance of viral load. Direct-acting antivirals have been used successfully in the treatment of HCV-associated MPGN. When cryoglobulinemia is present, immunosuppressive therapy is recommended. These regimens commonly include rituximab and steroids.⁵ Rituximab is also used for nephrotic syndrome associated with MPGN, as recommended in the 2018 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines.⁶

When initiating rituximab therapy in a patient who tests positive for hepatitis B (HBcAb positive or HBsAb positive), it is recommended to follow the established guidelines, which include treating them with entecavir for prophylaxis to prevent reactivation or a flare of hepatitis B.⁷ The patient in this case needed close follow-up in the nephrology and hepatology clinic. Immunosuppressive therapy was not pursued while the patient was admitted to the hospital due to instability with housing, transportation, and difficulty in ensuring close follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should maintain a broad differential even in the face of confirmatory imaging and other objective findings. In the case of anasarca, nephrotic syndrome should be considered. Key causes of nephrotic syndromes include MPGN, membranous nephropathy, minimal change disease, and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. MPGN is a histopathological diagnosis, and it is essential to identify if it is secondary to immune complexes or only complement mediated because Ig-complement deposits are seen in autoimmune disease and infection. The management of MPGN due to HCV infection relies on antiviral therapy. In the presence of cryoglobulinemia, immunosuppressive therapy is recommended.

Histology is the gold standard for cirrhosis diagnosis. However, a combination of clinical history, physical examination findings, and supportive laboratory and radiographic features is generally sufficient to make the diagnosis. Routine ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) imaging often identifies a nodular liver contour with sequelae of portal hypertension, including splenomegaly, varices, and ascites, which can suggest cirrhosis when supported by laboratory parameters and clinical features. As a result, the diagnosis is typically made clinically.¹ Many patients with compensated cirrhosis go undetected. The presence of a decompensation event (ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, variceal hemorrhage, or hepatic encephalopathy) often leads to index diagnosis when patients were previously compensated. When a patient presents with suspected decompensated cirrhosis, it is important to consider other diagnoses with similar presentations and ensure that multiple disease processes are not contributing to the symptoms.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 64-year-old male with a history of intravenous (IV) methamphetamine use and prior incarceration presented with a 3-week history of progressively worsening generalized swelling. Prior to the onset of his symptoms, the patient injured his right lower extremity (RLE) in a bicycle accident, resulting in edema that progressed to bilateral lower extremity (BLE) edema and worsening fatigue, despite resolution of the initial injury. The patient gained weight though he could not quantify the amount. He experienced progressive hunger, thirst, and fatigue as well as increased sleep. Additionally, the patient experienced worsening dyspnea on exertion and orthopnea. He started using 2 pillows instead of 1 pillow at night.

The patient reported no fevers, chills, sputum production, chest pain, or paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea. He had no known history of sexually transmitted infections, no significant history of alcohol use, and occasional tobacco and marijuana use. He had been incarcerated > 10 years before and last used IV methamphetamine 3 years before. He did not regularly take any medications.

The patient’s vital signs included a temperature of 98.2 °F; 78/min heart rate; 15/min respiratory rate; 159/109 mm Hg blood pressure; and 98% oxygen saturation on room air. He had gained 20 lbs in the past 4 months. He had pitting edema in both legs and arms, as well as periorbital swelling, but no jugular venous distention, abnormal heart sounds, or murmurs. Breath sounds were distant but clear to auscultation. His abdomen was distended with normal bowel sounds and no fluid wave; mild epigastric tenderness was present, but no intra-abdominal masses were palpated. He had spider angiomata on the upper chest but no other stigmata of cirrhosis, such as caput medusae or jaundice. Tattoos were noted.

Laboratory test results showed a platelet count of 178 x 10³/μL (reference range, 140- 440 ~ 10³μL).Creatinine was 0.80 mg/dL (reference range, < 1.28 mg/dL), with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 99 mL/min/1.73 m² using the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology equation (reference range, > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), (reference range, > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), and Cystatin C was 1.14 mg/L (reference range, < 1.15 mg/L). His electrolytes and complete blood count were within normal limits, including sodium, 134 mmol/L; potassium, 4.4 mmol/L; chloride, 108 mmol/L; and carbon dioxide, 22.5 mmol/L.

Additional test results included alkaline phosphatase, 126 U/L (reference range, < 94 U/L); alanine transaminase, 41 U/L (reference range, < 45 U/L); aspartate aminotransferase, 70 U/L (reference range, < 35 U/L); total bilirubin, 0.6 mg/dL (reference range, < 1 mg/dL); albumin, 1.8 g/dL (reference range, 3.2-4.8 g/dL); and total protein, 6.3 g/dL (reference range, 5.9-8.3 g/dL). The patient’s international normalized ratio was 0.96 (reference range, 0.8-1.1), and brain natriuretic peptide was normal at 56 pg/mL. No prior laboratory results were available for comparison.

Urine toxicology was positive for amphetamines. Urinalysis demonstrated large occult blood, with a red blood cell count of 26/ HPF (reference range, 0/HPF) and proteinuria (100 mg/dL; reference range, negative), without bacteria, nitrites, or leukocyte esterase. Urine white blood cell count was 10/ HPF (reference range, 0/HPF), and fine granular casts and hyaline casts were present.

A noncontrast CT of the abdomen and pelvis in the emergency department showed an irregular liver contour with diffuse nodularity, multiple portosystemic collaterals, moderate abdominal and pelvic ascites, small bilateral pleural effusions with associated atelectasis, and anasarca consistent with cirrhosis (Figure 1). The patient was admitted to the internal medicine service for workup and management of newly diagnosed cirrhosis.

Paracentesis revealed straw-colored fluid with an ascitic fluid neutrophil count of 17/μL, a protein level of < 3 g/dL and albumin level of < 1.5 g/dL. Gram stain of the ascitic fluid showed a moderate white blood cell count with no organisms. Fluid culture showed no microbial growth.

Initial workup for cirrhosis demonstrated a positive total hepatitis A antibody. The patient had a nonreactive hepatitis B surface antigen and surface antibody, but a reactive hepatitis B core antibody; a hepatitis B DNA level was not ordered. He had a reactive hepatitis C antibody with a viral load of 4,490,000 II/mL (genotype 1a). The patient’s iron level was 120 μg/dL, with a calculated total iron-binding capacity (TIBC) of 126.2 μg/dL. His transferrin saturation (TSAT) (serum iron divided by TIBC) was 95%. The patient had nonreactive antinuclear antibody and antimitochondrial antibody tests and a positive antismooth muscle antibody test with a titer of 1:40. His α-fetoprotein (AFP) level was 505 ng/mL (reference range, < 8 ng/mL).

Follow-up MRI of the abdomen and pelvis showed cirrhotic morphology with large volume ascites and portosystemic collaterals, consistent with portal hypertension. Additionally, it showed multiple scattered peripheral sub centimeter hyperenhancing foci, most likely representing benign lesions.

The patient's spot urine protein-creatinine ratio was 3.76. To better quantify proteinuria, a 24-hour urine collection was performed and revealed 12.8 g/d of urine protein (reference range, 0-0.17 g/d). His serum triglyceride level was 175 mg/dL (reference range, 40-60 mg/dL); total cholesterol was 177 mg/ dL (reference range, ≤ 200 mg/dL); low density lipoprotein cholesterol was 98 mg/ dL (reference range, ≤ 130 mg/dL); and highdensity lipoprotein cholesterol was 43.8 mg/ dL (reference range, ≥ 40 mg/dL); C3 complement level was 71 mg/dL (reference range, 82-185 mg/dL); and C4 complement level was 22 mg/dL (reference range, 15-53 mg/ dL). His rheumatoid factor was < 14 IU/mL. Tests for rapid plasma reagin and HIV antigen- antibody were nonreactive, and the phospholipase A2 receptor antibody test was negative. The patient tested positive for QuantiFERON-TB Gold and qualitative cryoglobulin, which indicated a cryocrit of 1%.

A renal biopsy was performed, revealing diffuse podocyte foot process effacement and glomerulonephritis with low-grade C3 and immunoglobulin (Ig) G deposits, consistent with early membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (MPGN) (Figures 2 and 3).

The patient was initially diuresed with IV furosemide without significant urine output. He was then diuresed with IV 25% albumin (total, 25 g), followed by IV furosemide 40 mg twice daily, which led to significant urine output and resolution of his anasarca. Given the patient’s hypoalbuminemic state, IV albumin was necessary to deliver furosemide to the proximal tubule. He was started on lisinopril for renal protection and discharged with spironolactone and furosemide for fluid management in the context of cirrhosis.

The patient was evaluated by the Liver Nodule Clinic, which includes specialists from hepatology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, interventional radiology, and diagnostic radiology. The team considered the patient’s medical history and characteristics of the nodules on imaging. Notable aspects of the patient’s history included hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and an elevated AFP level, although imaging showed no lesion concerning for malignancy. Given these findings, the patient was scheduled for a liver biopsy to establish a tissue diagnosis of cirrhosis. Hepatology, nephrology, and infectious disease specialists coordinated to plan the management and treatment of latent tuberculosis (TB), chronic HCV, MPGN, compensated cirrhosis, and suspicious liver lesions.

The patient chose to handle management and treatment as an outpatient. He was discharged with furosemide and spironolactone for anasarca management, and amlodipine and lisinopril for his hypertension and MPGN. Follow-up appointments were scheduled with infectious disease for management of latent TB and HCV, nephrology for MPGN, gastroenterology for cirrhosis, and interventional radiology for liver biopsy. Unfortunately, the patient was unhoused with limited access to transportation, which prevented timely follow-up. Given these social factors, immunosuppression was not started. Additionally, he did not start on HCV therapy because the viral load was still pending at time of discharge.

DISCUSSION

The diagnosis of decompensated cirrhosis was prematurely established, resulting in a diagnostic delay, a form of diagnostic error. However, on hospital day 2, the initial hypothesis of decompensated cirrhosis as the sole driver of the patient’s presentation was reconsidered due to the disconnect between the severity of hypoalbuminemia and diffuse edema (anasarca), and the absence of laboratory evidence of hepatic decompensation (normal international normalized ratio, bilirubin, and low but normal platelet count). Although image findings supported cirrhosis, laboratory markers did not indicate hepatic decompensation. The severity of hypoalbuminemia and anasarca, along with an indeterminate Serum-Ascites Albumin Gradient, prompted the patient’s care team to consider other causes, specifically, nephrotic syndrome.

The patien’s spot protein-to-creatinine ratio was 3.76 (reference range < 0.2 mg/mg creatinine), but a 24-hour urine protein collection was 12.8 g/day (reference range < 150 mg/day). While most spot urine protein- to-creatinine ratios (UPCR) correlate with a 24-hour urine collection, discrepancies can occur, as in this case. It is important to recognize that the spot UPCR assumes that patients are excreting 1000 mg of creatinine daily in their urine, which is not always the case. In addition, changes in urine osmolality can lead to different values. The gold standard for proteinuria is a 24-hour urine collection for protein and creatinine.

The patient’s nephrotic-range proteinuria and severe hypoalbuminemia are not solely explained by cirrhosis. In addition, the patient’s lower extremity edema pointed to nephrotic syndrome. The differential diagnosis for nephrotic syndrome includes both primary and secondary forms of membranous nephropathy, minimal change disease, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, and MPGN, a histopathological diagnosis that requires distinguishing between immune complex-mediated and complement-mediated forms. Other causes of nephrotic syndrome that do not fit in any of these buckets include amyloidosis, IgA nephropathy, and diabetes mellitus (DM). Despite DM being a common cause of nephrotic range proteinuria, it rarely leads to full nephrotic syndrome.

When considering the diagnosis, we reframed the patient’s clinical syndrome as compensated cirrhosis plus nephrotic syndrome. This approach prioritized identifying a cause that could explain both cirrhosis (from any cause) leading to IgA nephropathy or injection drug use serving as a risk factor for cirrhosis and nephrotic syndrome through HCV or AA amyloidosis, respectively. This problem representation guided us to the correct diagnosis. There are multiple renal diseases associated with HCV infection, including MPGN, membranous nephropathy, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, and IgA nephropathy.² MPGN and mixed cryoglobulinemia are the most common. In the past, MPGN was classified as type I, II, and III.

The patient’s urine toxicology revealed recent amphetamine use, which can also lead to acute kidney injury through rhabdomyolysis or acute interstitial nephritis (AIN).³ In the cases of rhabdomyolysis, urinalysis would show positive heme without any red blood cell on microscopic analysis, which was not present in this case. AIN commonly manifests as acute kidney injury, pyuria, and proteinuria but without a decrease in complement levels.⁴ While the patient’s urine sediment included white blood cell (10/high-power field), the presence of microscopic hematuria, decreased complement levels, and proteinuria in the context of HCV positivity makes MPGN more likely than AIN.

Recently, there has been greater emphasis on using immunofluorescence for kidney biopsies. MPGN is now classified into 2 main categories: MPGN with mesangial immunoglobulins and C3 deposits in the capillary walls, and MPGN with C3 deposits but without Ig.⁵ MPGN with Ig-complement deposits is seen in autoimmune diseases and infections and is associated with dysproteinemias.

The renal biopsy in this patient was consistent with MPGN with immunofluorescence, a common finding in patients with infection. By synthesizing these data, we concluded that the patient represented a case of chronic HCV infection that led to MPGN with cryoglobulinemia. The normal C4 and negative RF do not suggest cryoglobulinemic crisis. Compensated cirrhosis was seen on imaging, pending liver biopsy.

Treatment

The management of MPGN secondary to HCV infection relies on the treatment of the underlying infection and clearance of viral load. Direct-acting antivirals have been used successfully in the treatment of HCV-associated MPGN. When cryoglobulinemia is present, immunosuppressive therapy is recommended. These regimens commonly include rituximab and steroids.⁵ Rituximab is also used for nephrotic syndrome associated with MPGN, as recommended in the 2018 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines.⁶

When initiating rituximab therapy in a patient who tests positive for hepatitis B (HBcAb positive or HBsAb positive), it is recommended to follow the established guidelines, which include treating them with entecavir for prophylaxis to prevent reactivation or a flare of hepatitis B.⁷ The patient in this case needed close follow-up in the nephrology and hepatology clinic. Immunosuppressive therapy was not pursued while the patient was admitted to the hospital due to instability with housing, transportation, and difficulty in ensuring close follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should maintain a broad differential even in the face of confirmatory imaging and other objective findings. In the case of anasarca, nephrotic syndrome should be considered. Key causes of nephrotic syndromes include MPGN, membranous nephropathy, minimal change disease, and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. MPGN is a histopathological diagnosis, and it is essential to identify if it is secondary to immune complexes or only complement mediated because Ig-complement deposits are seen in autoimmune disease and infection. The management of MPGN due to HCV infection relies on antiviral therapy. In the presence of cryoglobulinemia, immunosuppressive therapy is recommended.

Histology is the gold standard for cirrhosis diagnosis. However, a combination of clinical history, physical examination findings, and supportive laboratory and radiographic features is generally sufficient to make the diagnosis. Routine ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) imaging often identifies a nodular liver contour with sequelae of portal hypertension, including splenomegaly, varices, and ascites, which can suggest cirrhosis when supported by laboratory parameters and clinical features. As a result, the diagnosis is typically made clinically.¹ Many patients with compensated cirrhosis go undetected. The presence of a decompensation event (ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, variceal hemorrhage, or hepatic encephalopathy) often leads to index diagnosis when patients were previously compensated. When a patient presents with suspected decompensated cirrhosis, it is important to consider other diagnoses with similar presentations and ensure that multiple disease processes are not contributing to the symptoms.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 64-year-old male with a history of intravenous (IV) methamphetamine use and prior incarceration presented with a 3-week history of progressively worsening generalized swelling. Prior to the onset of his symptoms, the patient injured his right lower extremity (RLE) in a bicycle accident, resulting in edema that progressed to bilateral lower extremity (BLE) edema and worsening fatigue, despite resolution of the initial injury. The patient gained weight though he could not quantify the amount. He experienced progressive hunger, thirst, and fatigue as well as increased sleep. Additionally, the patient experienced worsening dyspnea on exertion and orthopnea. He started using 2 pillows instead of 1 pillow at night.

The patient reported no fevers, chills, sputum production, chest pain, or paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea. He had no known history of sexually transmitted infections, no significant history of alcohol use, and occasional tobacco and marijuana use. He had been incarcerated > 10 years before and last used IV methamphetamine 3 years before. He did not regularly take any medications.

The patient’s vital signs included a temperature of 98.2 °F; 78/min heart rate; 15/min respiratory rate; 159/109 mm Hg blood pressure; and 98% oxygen saturation on room air. He had gained 20 lbs in the past 4 months. He had pitting edema in both legs and arms, as well as periorbital swelling, but no jugular venous distention, abnormal heart sounds, or murmurs. Breath sounds were distant but clear to auscultation. His abdomen was distended with normal bowel sounds and no fluid wave; mild epigastric tenderness was present, but no intra-abdominal masses were palpated. He had spider angiomata on the upper chest but no other stigmata of cirrhosis, such as caput medusae or jaundice. Tattoos were noted.

Laboratory test results showed a platelet count of 178 x 10³/μL (reference range, 140- 440 ~ 10³μL).Creatinine was 0.80 mg/dL (reference range, < 1.28 mg/dL), with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 99 mL/min/1.73 m² using the Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology equation (reference range, > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), (reference range, > 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), and Cystatin C was 1.14 mg/L (reference range, < 1.15 mg/L). His electrolytes and complete blood count were within normal limits, including sodium, 134 mmol/L; potassium, 4.4 mmol/L; chloride, 108 mmol/L; and carbon dioxide, 22.5 mmol/L.

Additional test results included alkaline phosphatase, 126 U/L (reference range, < 94 U/L); alanine transaminase, 41 U/L (reference range, < 45 U/L); aspartate aminotransferase, 70 U/L (reference range, < 35 U/L); total bilirubin, 0.6 mg/dL (reference range, < 1 mg/dL); albumin, 1.8 g/dL (reference range, 3.2-4.8 g/dL); and total protein, 6.3 g/dL (reference range, 5.9-8.3 g/dL). The patient’s international normalized ratio was 0.96 (reference range, 0.8-1.1), and brain natriuretic peptide was normal at 56 pg/mL. No prior laboratory results were available for comparison.

Urine toxicology was positive for amphetamines. Urinalysis demonstrated large occult blood, with a red blood cell count of 26/ HPF (reference range, 0/HPF) and proteinuria (100 mg/dL; reference range, negative), without bacteria, nitrites, or leukocyte esterase. Urine white blood cell count was 10/ HPF (reference range, 0/HPF), and fine granular casts and hyaline casts were present.

A noncontrast CT of the abdomen and pelvis in the emergency department showed an irregular liver contour with diffuse nodularity, multiple portosystemic collaterals, moderate abdominal and pelvic ascites, small bilateral pleural effusions with associated atelectasis, and anasarca consistent with cirrhosis (Figure 1). The patient was admitted to the internal medicine service for workup and management of newly diagnosed cirrhosis.

Paracentesis revealed straw-colored fluid with an ascitic fluid neutrophil count of 17/μL, a protein level of < 3 g/dL and albumin level of < 1.5 g/dL. Gram stain of the ascitic fluid showed a moderate white blood cell count with no organisms. Fluid culture showed no microbial growth.

Initial workup for cirrhosis demonstrated a positive total hepatitis A antibody. The patient had a nonreactive hepatitis B surface antigen and surface antibody, but a reactive hepatitis B core antibody; a hepatitis B DNA level was not ordered. He had a reactive hepatitis C antibody with a viral load of 4,490,000 II/mL (genotype 1a). The patient’s iron level was 120 μg/dL, with a calculated total iron-binding capacity (TIBC) of 126.2 μg/dL. His transferrin saturation (TSAT) (serum iron divided by TIBC) was 95%. The patient had nonreactive antinuclear antibody and antimitochondrial antibody tests and a positive antismooth muscle antibody test with a titer of 1:40. His α-fetoprotein (AFP) level was 505 ng/mL (reference range, < 8 ng/mL).

Follow-up MRI of the abdomen and pelvis showed cirrhotic morphology with large volume ascites and portosystemic collaterals, consistent with portal hypertension. Additionally, it showed multiple scattered peripheral sub centimeter hyperenhancing foci, most likely representing benign lesions.

The patient's spot urine protein-creatinine ratio was 3.76. To better quantify proteinuria, a 24-hour urine collection was performed and revealed 12.8 g/d of urine protein (reference range, 0-0.17 g/d). His serum triglyceride level was 175 mg/dL (reference range, 40-60 mg/dL); total cholesterol was 177 mg/ dL (reference range, ≤ 200 mg/dL); low density lipoprotein cholesterol was 98 mg/ dL (reference range, ≤ 130 mg/dL); and highdensity lipoprotein cholesterol was 43.8 mg/ dL (reference range, ≥ 40 mg/dL); C3 complement level was 71 mg/dL (reference range, 82-185 mg/dL); and C4 complement level was 22 mg/dL (reference range, 15-53 mg/ dL). His rheumatoid factor was < 14 IU/mL. Tests for rapid plasma reagin and HIV antigen- antibody were nonreactive, and the phospholipase A2 receptor antibody test was negative. The patient tested positive for QuantiFERON-TB Gold and qualitative cryoglobulin, which indicated a cryocrit of 1%.

A renal biopsy was performed, revealing diffuse podocyte foot process effacement and glomerulonephritis with low-grade C3 and immunoglobulin (Ig) G deposits, consistent with early membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis (MPGN) (Figures 2 and 3).

The patient was initially diuresed with IV furosemide without significant urine output. He was then diuresed with IV 25% albumin (total, 25 g), followed by IV furosemide 40 mg twice daily, which led to significant urine output and resolution of his anasarca. Given the patient’s hypoalbuminemic state, IV albumin was necessary to deliver furosemide to the proximal tubule. He was started on lisinopril for renal protection and discharged with spironolactone and furosemide for fluid management in the context of cirrhosis.

The patient was evaluated by the Liver Nodule Clinic, which includes specialists from hepatology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, interventional radiology, and diagnostic radiology. The team considered the patient’s medical history and characteristics of the nodules on imaging. Notable aspects of the patient’s history included hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and an elevated AFP level, although imaging showed no lesion concerning for malignancy. Given these findings, the patient was scheduled for a liver biopsy to establish a tissue diagnosis of cirrhosis. Hepatology, nephrology, and infectious disease specialists coordinated to plan the management and treatment of latent tuberculosis (TB), chronic HCV, MPGN, compensated cirrhosis, and suspicious liver lesions.

The patient chose to handle management and treatment as an outpatient. He was discharged with furosemide and spironolactone for anasarca management, and amlodipine and lisinopril for his hypertension and MPGN. Follow-up appointments were scheduled with infectious disease for management of latent TB and HCV, nephrology for MPGN, gastroenterology for cirrhosis, and interventional radiology for liver biopsy. Unfortunately, the patient was unhoused with limited access to transportation, which prevented timely follow-up. Given these social factors, immunosuppression was not started. Additionally, he did not start on HCV therapy because the viral load was still pending at time of discharge.

DISCUSSION

The diagnosis of decompensated cirrhosis was prematurely established, resulting in a diagnostic delay, a form of diagnostic error. However, on hospital day 2, the initial hypothesis of decompensated cirrhosis as the sole driver of the patient’s presentation was reconsidered due to the disconnect between the severity of hypoalbuminemia and diffuse edema (anasarca), and the absence of laboratory evidence of hepatic decompensation (normal international normalized ratio, bilirubin, and low but normal platelet count). Although image findings supported cirrhosis, laboratory markers did not indicate hepatic decompensation. The severity of hypoalbuminemia and anasarca, along with an indeterminate Serum-Ascites Albumin Gradient, prompted the patient’s care team to consider other causes, specifically, nephrotic syndrome.

The patien’s spot protein-to-creatinine ratio was 3.76 (reference range < 0.2 mg/mg creatinine), but a 24-hour urine protein collection was 12.8 g/day (reference range < 150 mg/day). While most spot urine protein- to-creatinine ratios (UPCR) correlate with a 24-hour urine collection, discrepancies can occur, as in this case. It is important to recognize that the spot UPCR assumes that patients are excreting 1000 mg of creatinine daily in their urine, which is not always the case. In addition, changes in urine osmolality can lead to different values. The gold standard for proteinuria is a 24-hour urine collection for protein and creatinine.

The patient’s nephrotic-range proteinuria and severe hypoalbuminemia are not solely explained by cirrhosis. In addition, the patient’s lower extremity edema pointed to nephrotic syndrome. The differential diagnosis for nephrotic syndrome includes both primary and secondary forms of membranous nephropathy, minimal change disease, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, and MPGN, a histopathological diagnosis that requires distinguishing between immune complex-mediated and complement-mediated forms. Other causes of nephrotic syndrome that do not fit in any of these buckets include amyloidosis, IgA nephropathy, and diabetes mellitus (DM). Despite DM being a common cause of nephrotic range proteinuria, it rarely leads to full nephrotic syndrome.

When considering the diagnosis, we reframed the patient’s clinical syndrome as compensated cirrhosis plus nephrotic syndrome. This approach prioritized identifying a cause that could explain both cirrhosis (from any cause) leading to IgA nephropathy or injection drug use serving as a risk factor for cirrhosis and nephrotic syndrome through HCV or AA amyloidosis, respectively. This problem representation guided us to the correct diagnosis. There are multiple renal diseases associated with HCV infection, including MPGN, membranous nephropathy, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, and IgA nephropathy.² MPGN and mixed cryoglobulinemia are the most common. In the past, MPGN was classified as type I, II, and III.

The patient’s urine toxicology revealed recent amphetamine use, which can also lead to acute kidney injury through rhabdomyolysis or acute interstitial nephritis (AIN).³ In the cases of rhabdomyolysis, urinalysis would show positive heme without any red blood cell on microscopic analysis, which was not present in this case. AIN commonly manifests as acute kidney injury, pyuria, and proteinuria but without a decrease in complement levels.⁴ While the patient’s urine sediment included white blood cell (10/high-power field), the presence of microscopic hematuria, decreased complement levels, and proteinuria in the context of HCV positivity makes MPGN more likely than AIN.

Recently, there has been greater emphasis on using immunofluorescence for kidney biopsies. MPGN is now classified into 2 main categories: MPGN with mesangial immunoglobulins and C3 deposits in the capillary walls, and MPGN with C3 deposits but without Ig.⁵ MPGN with Ig-complement deposits is seen in autoimmune diseases and infections and is associated with dysproteinemias.

The renal biopsy in this patient was consistent with MPGN with immunofluorescence, a common finding in patients with infection. By synthesizing these data, we concluded that the patient represented a case of chronic HCV infection that led to MPGN with cryoglobulinemia. The normal C4 and negative RF do not suggest cryoglobulinemic crisis. Compensated cirrhosis was seen on imaging, pending liver biopsy.

Treatment

The management of MPGN secondary to HCV infection relies on the treatment of the underlying infection and clearance of viral load. Direct-acting antivirals have been used successfully in the treatment of HCV-associated MPGN. When cryoglobulinemia is present, immunosuppressive therapy is recommended. These regimens commonly include rituximab and steroids.⁵ Rituximab is also used for nephrotic syndrome associated with MPGN, as recommended in the 2018 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines.⁶

When initiating rituximab therapy in a patient who tests positive for hepatitis B (HBcAb positive or HBsAb positive), it is recommended to follow the established guidelines, which include treating them with entecavir for prophylaxis to prevent reactivation or a flare of hepatitis B.⁷ The patient in this case needed close follow-up in the nephrology and hepatology clinic. Immunosuppressive therapy was not pursued while the patient was admitted to the hospital due to instability with housing, transportation, and difficulty in ensuring close follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should maintain a broad differential even in the face of confirmatory imaging and other objective findings. In the case of anasarca, nephrotic syndrome should be considered. Key causes of nephrotic syndromes include MPGN, membranous nephropathy, minimal change disease, and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. MPGN is a histopathological diagnosis, and it is essential to identify if it is secondary to immune complexes or only complement mediated because Ig-complement deposits are seen in autoimmune disease and infection. The management of MPGN due to HCV infection relies on antiviral therapy. In the presence of cryoglobulinemia, immunosuppressive therapy is recommended.

A 90-year-old man presented for evaluation of a large basal cell carcinoma (BCC) involving the nasal region. The lesion was a 7×4-cm pink, crusted, verrucous plaque covering the majority of the nose and extending onto the malar cheeks that originally had been biopsied 26 years prior, and repeat biopsy was performed 3 years prior. Results from both biopsies were consistent with BCC. The patient had avoided treatment for many years due to fear of losing his nose.

Given the size and location of the tumor, surgical intervention posed major challenges for both functional and cosmetic outcomes. After careful consideration and discussion of treatment options, which included Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), wide local excision, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy, the decision was made to start the patient on vismodegib 150 mg once daily as well as L-carnitine 330 mg twice daily to help with muscle cramps. A baseline complete metabolic panel with an estimated glomerular filtration rate was unremarkable.

By the patient’s first follow-up visit after 2 months of therapy, he had experienced marked clinical improvement with notable regression of the tumor (Figure 1). He reported no adverse effects (eg, muscle cramps, dysgeusia, hair loss, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea). At subsequent follow-up visits, the patient continued to demonstrate clinical improvement. His only adverse effect was a 6-kg weight loss over the prior 6 months of initiating therapy despite no changes in taste or appetite. His dose of vismodegib was decreased to an alternative regimen of 150 mg daily for the first 2 weeks of each month with a drug holiday the rest of the month. Since that time, his weight has stabilized and he has continued with treatment.

Comment

Vismodegib was the first Hedgehog (Hh) inhibitor approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for management of selected locally advanced and metastatic BCC in adults.^1,2 Genetic alterations in the Hh signaling pathway resulting in proliferation of basal cells are present in nearly all BCCs.² In normal function, when the Hh ligand is absent at the patched (PTCH1) receptor, smoothened (SMO) is inhibited. When Hh ligand binds PTCH1, SMO is activated with downstream effects of triggering cell survival and proliferation in the nucleus via GLI. Loss of function mutations at the PTCH1 receptor or SMO-activating mutations lead to the same downstream effects, even when Hh ligand is absent.¹ This allows for unregulated tumor growth.

Vismodegib is a small-molecule SMO inhibitor that blocks aberrant activation of the Hh signaling pathway, thereby slowing the growth of BCCs (Figure 2).^3,4 Vismodegib and sonidegib have been used to treat patients with basal cell nevus syndrome as well as metastatic or locally advanced BCCs. At least 50% of advanced BCCs develop resistance to vismodegib, commonly via acquiring mutations in SMO.⁴

Basal cell carcinoma can be classified as low or high risk based on risk for recurrence. First-line treatments for low-risk BCC are surgical excision, electrodessication and curettage, and MMS.⁴ Second-line treatment includes radiation therapy. High-risk tumors include those involving anatomic locations of Area H near the eyelids, nose, ears, hands, feet, or genitals in addition to tumors with an aggressive histologic subtype.^4,5 First-line treatments for high-risk BCC are MMS or surgical excision. Second-line treatments are radiation therapy or systemic therapy, such as vismodegib.⁴

Although Hh inhibitors are not a first-line treatment, our case highlights vismodegib’s effectiveness in the management of a large unresectable BCC on the nose of an elderly patient. Our patient opted out of surgical first-line options due to functional and cosmetic concerns.⁴ He also declined radiation treatment due to financial cost and difficulty with transportation. The patient chose to pursue systemic vismodegib therapy through shared decision-making with dermatology. Vismodegib treatment alone granted our patient a highly remarkable result.

There are limited clinical data on the effectiveness and safety profile of vismodegib in elderly patients, even though this is a high-risk population for BCC.⁶ In a study that categorized responses to vismodegib in 13 patients with canthal BCC, 5 experienced a complete clinical response (defined as complete regression of the tumor), and 8 achieved partial clinical response (defined as regression but not to the extent of a complete response).⁷ Our patient’s successful response is notable, as it reinforces vismodegib’s effectiveness as a treatment option for BCC in a sensitive facial area. In addition, our patient’s minimal adverse effect profile is evidence in support of establishing visogemib’s role as a viable treatment option in advanced BCC in the elderly.

Alternative dosing regimens of vismodegib involve the use of drug holidays.⁸ Utilizing a regimen of 1 week with and 3 weeks without vismodegib for 5 to 14 cycles has led to the resolution of BCC with decreased adverse effects.⁸ Furthermore, the MIKIE study demonstrated the efficacy of 2 dosing regimens: 12 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg followed by 3 cycles of 8 placebo weeks and 12 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg and 24 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg followed by 3 cycles of 8 placebo weeks and 8 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg.⁹ Both regimens appeared viable to treat BCC in patients who were at risk for treatment discontinuation due to adverse effects.¹⁰

One adverse effect associated with vismodegib is muscle cramps, which are a potential cause of treatment discontinuation. The mechanism by which vismodegib causes cramps is not fully understood but is attributed to contractions from Ca²⁺ influx into muscle cells and a lack of adenosine triphosphate to allow muscle relaxation.¹¹ This is due to vismodegib’s inhibition of the SMO signaling pathway and activation of the SMO–Ca2+/ AMP-related kinase axis.¹² L-carnitine can be used as an adjuvant with vismodegib to address this adverse effect. L-carnitine is found in muscle cells, where its role is to produce energy by utilizing fatty acids.¹³ It is hypothesized that L-carnitine helps prevent cramps through production of adenosine triphosphate via fatty acid Β-oxidation that aids in stabilizing the sarcolemma and promoting muscle relaxation in skeletal muscle.^13,14 Evidence suggests that making L-carnitine a common adjuvant to vismodegib can aid in preventing this adverse effect.

Vismodegib can be an effective treatment option for large nasal BCCs that are difficult to resect. Our case demonstrates both clinical efficacy and a favorable safety profile in an elderly patient. Further studies and long-term follow-up are warranted to establish the role of vismodegib in the evolving landscape of BCC management.

A 90-year-old man presented for evaluation of a large basal cell carcinoma (BCC) involving the nasal region. The lesion was a 7×4-cm pink, crusted, verrucous plaque covering the majority of the nose and extending onto the malar cheeks that originally had been biopsied 26 years prior, and repeat biopsy was performed 3 years prior. Results from both biopsies were consistent with BCC. The patient had avoided treatment for many years due to fear of losing his nose.

Given the size and location of the tumor, surgical intervention posed major challenges for both functional and cosmetic outcomes. After careful consideration and discussion of treatment options, which included Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), wide local excision, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy, the decision was made to start the patient on vismodegib 150 mg once daily as well as L-carnitine 330 mg twice daily to help with muscle cramps. A baseline complete metabolic panel with an estimated glomerular filtration rate was unremarkable.

By the patient’s first follow-up visit after 2 months of therapy, he had experienced marked clinical improvement with notable regression of the tumor (Figure 1). He reported no adverse effects (eg, muscle cramps, dysgeusia, hair loss, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea). At subsequent follow-up visits, the patient continued to demonstrate clinical improvement. His only adverse effect was a 6-kg weight loss over the prior 6 months of initiating therapy despite no changes in taste or appetite. His dose of vismodegib was decreased to an alternative regimen of 150 mg daily for the first 2 weeks of each month with a drug holiday the rest of the month. Since that time, his weight has stabilized and he has continued with treatment.

Comment

Vismodegib was the first Hedgehog (Hh) inhibitor approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for management of selected locally advanced and metastatic BCC in adults.^1,2 Genetic alterations in the Hh signaling pathway resulting in proliferation of basal cells are present in nearly all BCCs.² In normal function, when the Hh ligand is absent at the patched (PTCH1) receptor, smoothened (SMO) is inhibited. When Hh ligand binds PTCH1, SMO is activated with downstream effects of triggering cell survival and proliferation in the nucleus via GLI. Loss of function mutations at the PTCH1 receptor or SMO-activating mutations lead to the same downstream effects, even when Hh ligand is absent.¹ This allows for unregulated tumor growth.

Vismodegib is a small-molecule SMO inhibitor that blocks aberrant activation of the Hh signaling pathway, thereby slowing the growth of BCCs (Figure 2).^3,4 Vismodegib and sonidegib have been used to treat patients with basal cell nevus syndrome as well as metastatic or locally advanced BCCs. At least 50% of advanced BCCs develop resistance to vismodegib, commonly via acquiring mutations in SMO.⁴

Basal cell carcinoma can be classified as low or high risk based on risk for recurrence. First-line treatments for low-risk BCC are surgical excision, electrodessication and curettage, and MMS.⁴ Second-line treatment includes radiation therapy. High-risk tumors include those involving anatomic locations of Area H near the eyelids, nose, ears, hands, feet, or genitals in addition to tumors with an aggressive histologic subtype.^4,5 First-line treatments for high-risk BCC are MMS or surgical excision. Second-line treatments are radiation therapy or systemic therapy, such as vismodegib.⁴

Although Hh inhibitors are not a first-line treatment, our case highlights vismodegib’s effectiveness in the management of a large unresectable BCC on the nose of an elderly patient. Our patient opted out of surgical first-line options due to functional and cosmetic concerns.⁴ He also declined radiation treatment due to financial cost and difficulty with transportation. The patient chose to pursue systemic vismodegib therapy through shared decision-making with dermatology. Vismodegib treatment alone granted our patient a highly remarkable result.

There are limited clinical data on the effectiveness and safety profile of vismodegib in elderly patients, even though this is a high-risk population for BCC.⁶ In a study that categorized responses to vismodegib in 13 patients with canthal BCC, 5 experienced a complete clinical response (defined as complete regression of the tumor), and 8 achieved partial clinical response (defined as regression but not to the extent of a complete response).⁷ Our patient’s successful response is notable, as it reinforces vismodegib’s effectiveness as a treatment option for BCC in a sensitive facial area. In addition, our patient’s minimal adverse effect profile is evidence in support of establishing visogemib’s role as a viable treatment option in advanced BCC in the elderly.

Alternative dosing regimens of vismodegib involve the use of drug holidays.⁸ Utilizing a regimen of 1 week with and 3 weeks without vismodegib for 5 to 14 cycles has led to the resolution of BCC with decreased adverse effects.⁸ Furthermore, the MIKIE study demonstrated the efficacy of 2 dosing regimens: 12 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg followed by 3 cycles of 8 placebo weeks and 12 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg and 24 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg followed by 3 cycles of 8 placebo weeks and 8 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg.⁹ Both regimens appeared viable to treat BCC in patients who were at risk for treatment discontinuation due to adverse effects.¹⁰

One adverse effect associated with vismodegib is muscle cramps, which are a potential cause of treatment discontinuation. The mechanism by which vismodegib causes cramps is not fully understood but is attributed to contractions from Ca²⁺ influx into muscle cells and a lack of adenosine triphosphate to allow muscle relaxation.¹¹ This is due to vismodegib’s inhibition of the SMO signaling pathway and activation of the SMO–Ca2+/ AMP-related kinase axis.¹² L-carnitine can be used as an adjuvant with vismodegib to address this adverse effect. L-carnitine is found in muscle cells, where its role is to produce energy by utilizing fatty acids.¹³ It is hypothesized that L-carnitine helps prevent cramps through production of adenosine triphosphate via fatty acid Β-oxidation that aids in stabilizing the sarcolemma and promoting muscle relaxation in skeletal muscle.^13,14 Evidence suggests that making L-carnitine a common adjuvant to vismodegib can aid in preventing this adverse effect.

Vismodegib can be an effective treatment option for large nasal BCCs that are difficult to resect. Our case demonstrates both clinical efficacy and a favorable safety profile in an elderly patient. Further studies and long-term follow-up are warranted to establish the role of vismodegib in the evolving landscape of BCC management.

A 90-year-old man presented for evaluation of a large basal cell carcinoma (BCC) involving the nasal region. The lesion was a 7×4-cm pink, crusted, verrucous plaque covering the majority of the nose and extending onto the malar cheeks that originally had been biopsied 26 years prior, and repeat biopsy was performed 3 years prior. Results from both biopsies were consistent with BCC. The patient had avoided treatment for many years due to fear of losing his nose.

Given the size and location of the tumor, surgical intervention posed major challenges for both functional and cosmetic outcomes. After careful consideration and discussion of treatment options, which included Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), wide local excision, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy, the decision was made to start the patient on vismodegib 150 mg once daily as well as L-carnitine 330 mg twice daily to help with muscle cramps. A baseline complete metabolic panel with an estimated glomerular filtration rate was unremarkable.

By the patient’s first follow-up visit after 2 months of therapy, he had experienced marked clinical improvement with notable regression of the tumor (Figure 1). He reported no adverse effects (eg, muscle cramps, dysgeusia, hair loss, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea). At subsequent follow-up visits, the patient continued to demonstrate clinical improvement. His only adverse effect was a 6-kg weight loss over the prior 6 months of initiating therapy despite no changes in taste or appetite. His dose of vismodegib was decreased to an alternative regimen of 150 mg daily for the first 2 weeks of each month with a drug holiday the rest of the month. Since that time, his weight has stabilized and he has continued with treatment.

Comment

Vismodegib was the first Hedgehog (Hh) inhibitor approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for management of selected locally advanced and metastatic BCC in adults.^1,2 Genetic alterations in the Hh signaling pathway resulting in proliferation of basal cells are present in nearly all BCCs.² In normal function, when the Hh ligand is absent at the patched (PTCH1) receptor, smoothened (SMO) is inhibited. When Hh ligand binds PTCH1, SMO is activated with downstream effects of triggering cell survival and proliferation in the nucleus via GLI. Loss of function mutations at the PTCH1 receptor or SMO-activating mutations lead to the same downstream effects, even when Hh ligand is absent.¹ This allows for unregulated tumor growth.

Vismodegib is a small-molecule SMO inhibitor that blocks aberrant activation of the Hh signaling pathway, thereby slowing the growth of BCCs (Figure 2).^3,4 Vismodegib and sonidegib have been used to treat patients with basal cell nevus syndrome as well as metastatic or locally advanced BCCs. At least 50% of advanced BCCs develop resistance to vismodegib, commonly via acquiring mutations in SMO.⁴

Basal cell carcinoma can be classified as low or high risk based on risk for recurrence. First-line treatments for low-risk BCC are surgical excision, electrodessication and curettage, and MMS.⁴ Second-line treatment includes radiation therapy. High-risk tumors include those involving anatomic locations of Area H near the eyelids, nose, ears, hands, feet, or genitals in addition to tumors with an aggressive histologic subtype.^4,5 First-line treatments for high-risk BCC are MMS or surgical excision. Second-line treatments are radiation therapy or systemic therapy, such as vismodegib.⁴

Although Hh inhibitors are not a first-line treatment, our case highlights vismodegib’s effectiveness in the management of a large unresectable BCC on the nose of an elderly patient. Our patient opted out of surgical first-line options due to functional and cosmetic concerns.⁴ He also declined radiation treatment due to financial cost and difficulty with transportation. The patient chose to pursue systemic vismodegib therapy through shared decision-making with dermatology. Vismodegib treatment alone granted our patient a highly remarkable result.

There are limited clinical data on the effectiveness and safety profile of vismodegib in elderly patients, even though this is a high-risk population for BCC.⁶ In a study that categorized responses to vismodegib in 13 patients with canthal BCC, 5 experienced a complete clinical response (defined as complete regression of the tumor), and 8 achieved partial clinical response (defined as regression but not to the extent of a complete response).⁷ Our patient’s successful response is notable, as it reinforces vismodegib’s effectiveness as a treatment option for BCC in a sensitive facial area. In addition, our patient’s minimal adverse effect profile is evidence in support of establishing visogemib’s role as a viable treatment option in advanced BCC in the elderly.

Alternative dosing regimens of vismodegib involve the use of drug holidays.⁸ Utilizing a regimen of 1 week with and 3 weeks without vismodegib for 5 to 14 cycles has led to the resolution of BCC with decreased adverse effects.⁸ Furthermore, the MIKIE study demonstrated the efficacy of 2 dosing regimens: 12 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg followed by 3 cycles of 8 placebo weeks and 12 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg and 24 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg followed by 3 cycles of 8 placebo weeks and 8 weeks of vismodegib 150 mg.⁹ Both regimens appeared viable to treat BCC in patients who were at risk for treatment discontinuation due to adverse effects.¹⁰

One adverse effect associated with vismodegib is muscle cramps, which are a potential cause of treatment discontinuation. The mechanism by which vismodegib causes cramps is not fully understood but is attributed to contractions from Ca²⁺ influx into muscle cells and a lack of adenosine triphosphate to allow muscle relaxation.¹¹ This is due to vismodegib’s inhibition of the SMO signaling pathway and activation of the SMO–Ca2+/ AMP-related kinase axis.¹² L-carnitine can be used as an adjuvant with vismodegib to address this adverse effect. L-carnitine is found in muscle cells, where its role is to produce energy by utilizing fatty acids.¹³ It is hypothesized that L-carnitine helps prevent cramps through production of adenosine triphosphate via fatty acid Β-oxidation that aids in stabilizing the sarcolemma and promoting muscle relaxation in skeletal muscle.^13,14 Evidence suggests that making L-carnitine a common adjuvant to vismodegib can aid in preventing this adverse effect.

Vismodegib can be an effective treatment option for large nasal BCCs that are difficult to resect. Our case demonstrates both clinical efficacy and a favorable safety profile in an elderly patient. Further studies and long-term follow-up are warranted to establish the role of vismodegib in the evolving landscape of BCC management.

DISCUSSION

A diagnosis of familial glomangiomatosis was made based on the clinical history and histopathologic findings from the punch biopsy. Glomus tumors are comprised of glomus cells, or undifferentiated smooth muscle cells responsible for thermoregulation.¹ Glomus tumors are classified into 3 categories: solid (predominantly glomus cells), glomangiomas (predominantly blood vessels), and glomangiomyomas (predominantly smooth muscle cells).² Glomangiomas, which comprise up to 20% of glomus tumors, typically present as bluish-purple, papular or nodular, hyperkeratotic lesions that are 2 to 10 mm in diameter.¹ These lesions are tender to palpation and pain may worsen with exposure to cold. Glomangiomas are associated with a classic triad of symptoms that include hypersensitivity, intermittent pain, and pinpoint pain, but patients rarely present with all 3.³

Glomangiomas tend to occur in areas rich with glomus bodies—the distal extremities—specifically the palms, wrists, forearms, feet, and subungual regions; visceral organ involvement including the GI tract is very rare.^1,4,5 About 38% to 68% of these lesions are hereditary or can be sporadic. If these lesions are hereditary, a patient is said to have familial glomangiomatosis. In familial glomangiomatosis, the glomulin gene is mutated in an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern with incomplete penetrance and variable expressivity. Inherited glomangiomas may present at birth or puberty similar to other vascular anomalies.⁴

Histopathology of glomangiomas shows rows of glomus cells (modified smooth muscle cells) surrounding distorted venous channels.^6,7 These lesions stain positive for CD34, vimentin, calponin, and α-smooth muscle actin, but are negative for desmin, S-100, and von Willebrand factor.^1,8 Although the patient’s medical history and physical examination are important in establishing the diagnosis, histopathology is confirmatory.

While the punch biopsy results were pending, a complete blood count (CBC) and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) were ordered due to concerns for blue rubber bleb nevus syndrome (BRBNS), a rare disorder with about 200 reported cases. Patients present with multiple blue to violaceous compressible nodules that feel rubbery in consistency and may be painful with compression. Lesions may be up to 5 cm in diameter and with time, the GI tract may also become involved.⁹ In the GI tract, the small bowel is the most common site of involvement and patients may present with severe iron deficiency anemia due to hemorrhage.¹⁰ Histopathologic features are nonspecific and have features of venous malformations but may include large, tortuous, dilated vessels with a single endothelial lining with possible smooth muscle in vessel walls or calcifications.¹¹ Due to concerns of BRBNS, laboratory studies (CBC and FOBT) were obtained but did not indicate the patient was experiencing a GI hemorrhage.

The differential diagnosis included Maffucci syndrome, also known as dyschondrodysplasia with hemangiomas, enchondromatosis with cavernous hemangiomas, or hemangiomatosis chondrodystrophic. Patients with Maffucci syndrome present with multiple enchondromas, soft tissue hemangiomas or lymphangiomas, and gliomas. These lesions tend to undergo malignant transformation from enchondromas to chondrosarcomas and hemangiomas to vascular sarcomas.¹² This diagnosis was less likely in the patient in this case as there were no concerns of skeletal involvement upon history and physical examination.

Lastly, Klippel-Trénaunay syndrome can be associated with similar cutaneous vascular manifestations.^13,14 This syndrome occurs due to somatic mutations altering angiogenesis during embryological development. This results in varicosities of superficial and deep venous systems, persistent embryonic veins, and valvular incompetence. However, these patients typically have capillary manifestations such as a flat, red, or purple port-wine stain present at birth and associated limb hypertrophy predominantly affecting a single lower limb.^15,16 The patient reported not having the lesions present at birth and because bilateral upper/lower extremity and trunk involvement is rare in this syndrome, a Klippel-Trénaunay syndrome diagnosis was unlikely even in the absence of biopsy results.

Treatment

Based on pathology results, the patient was diagnosed with familial glomangiomatosis and a discussion of treatment options ensued. Asymptomatic lesions can be periodically managed. In addition, there are several treatments for symptomatic lesions. Symptomatic lesions may be tender to palpation and or hypersensitive to temperature change (cold). Though they exhibit slow growth, they can invade surrounding tissues including nerve sheaths which can worsen pain.

Surgical resection, sclerotherapy, laser therapy, and electron beam radiation have been used on patients with symptomatic lesions.^8,17 Sclerotherapy involves introducing sterile solutions into a blood vessel’s lumen or into the vascular lesion itself to induce permanent endofibrosis and ablation.¹⁷ Hypertonic saline, sodium tetradecyl sulfate (STS), and absolute alcohol have been used to treat vascular anomalies as well as glomangiomas.¹⁷ Though case reports have noticed significant improvement in symptomatic lesions, sclerotherapy has been shown to be more effective in treating venous malformations than glomangiomas.^18,19

A long-pulsed 1064-nm neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser has also been effective in treating larger glomangiomas that would otherwise be difficult to excise.²⁰ The Nd:YAG laser has successfully treated lesions in patients with familial glomangiomatosis.^21,22

Our patient opted for sclerotherapy with STS on symptomatic lesions of the bilateral upper extremities and trunk. The patient reported moderate improvement of some lesions at a 4-week follow-up appointment and sclerotherapy with STS was repeated.

It is important to note that if a glomangioma is fully excised, the prognosis is favorable; however, recurrence after surgical excision is seen in 10% to 33% of cases.^23,24 Our patient had symptomatic lesions excised on the face, but they recurred. Glomangiomas confer a low risk of malignancy but some risk factors include lesions > 2 cm in size, deep lesions, muscle and/or bone invasion, and high mitotic activity.^17,25 If left untreated, high-risk glomangiomas can potentially be life-threatening due to growth, bleeding, or vital organ obstruction.²⁶

Primary Care Role

This patient was referred by his PCP assuming that these were symptomatic vascular lesions or telangiectasias (spider veins). Glomus cell tumors are classified as neurovascular neoplasms which may appear similar to vascular malformations or hemangiomas. ²⁷ PCPs serve an important role in performing cutaneous biopsies to increase patient access to dermatologic care, increase patient awareness of skin conditions including skin cancer, and to potentially diagnose a malignant lesion.²⁸ However, the PCP ultimately referred the patient to dermatology due to the number of growing, painful lesions. If the patient had a single lesion, it may have been appropriate to biopsy for diagnostic clarity.

A retrospective review found that the clinical diagnosis of glomus tumor showed concordance with histopathological diagnosis in 45.4% of cases. The most common alternate histopathological diagnoses were vascular tumors (25.9%) followed by other skin or soft tissue tumors like neuromas, leiomyomas, lipomas, or nevi.²⁹ Even if the PCP performed an initial biopsy with high clinical suspicion of a vascular malformation, some glomus cell tumors may be vascular tumors and vice versa.

Though the patient’s history was consistent with the classic triad of glomangiomas including hypersensitivity, intermittent pain, and pinpoint pain, histopathology was necessary to confirm the diagnosis. Given that these appeared to be similar to telangiectasias to the PCP, a rare condition like BRBNS was likely not considered upon initial presentation. Furthermore, the patient had a negative review of systems to include GI symptoms like melena or hematochezia. The PCP had no concern of GI hemorrhage as these lesions can involve the GI tract. If the patient were to endorse additional symptoms, a CBC to evaluate for anemia as well as a GI referral would be warranted.

CONCLUSIONS

This case exhibits the importance of differentiating glomus cell tumors from other more common vascular anomalies via a patient’s history and histopathological findings. Diagnosis and treatment may be difficult depending on the extent of lesions.

DISCUSSION

A diagnosis of familial glomangiomatosis was made based on the clinical history and histopathologic findings from the punch biopsy. Glomus tumors are comprised of glomus cells, or undifferentiated smooth muscle cells responsible for thermoregulation.¹ Glomus tumors are classified into 3 categories: solid (predominantly glomus cells), glomangiomas (predominantly blood vessels), and glomangiomyomas (predominantly smooth muscle cells).² Glomangiomas, which comprise up to 20% of glomus tumors, typically present as bluish-purple, papular or nodular, hyperkeratotic lesions that are 2 to 10 mm in diameter.¹ These lesions are tender to palpation and pain may worsen with exposure to cold. Glomangiomas are associated with a classic triad of symptoms that include hypersensitivity, intermittent pain, and pinpoint pain, but patients rarely present with all 3.³

Glomangiomas tend to occur in areas rich with glomus bodies—the distal extremities—specifically the palms, wrists, forearms, feet, and subungual regions; visceral organ involvement including the GI tract is very rare.^1,4,5 About 38% to 68% of these lesions are hereditary or can be sporadic. If these lesions are hereditary, a patient is said to have familial glomangiomatosis. In familial glomangiomatosis, the glomulin gene is mutated in an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern with incomplete penetrance and variable expressivity. Inherited glomangiomas may present at birth or puberty similar to other vascular anomalies.⁴

Histopathology of glomangiomas shows rows of glomus cells (modified smooth muscle cells) surrounding distorted venous channels.^6,7 These lesions stain positive for CD34, vimentin, calponin, and α-smooth muscle actin, but are negative for desmin, S-100, and von Willebrand factor.^1,8 Although the patient’s medical history and physical examination are important in establishing the diagnosis, histopathology is confirmatory.

While the punch biopsy results were pending, a complete blood count (CBC) and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) were ordered due to concerns for blue rubber bleb nevus syndrome (BRBNS), a rare disorder with about 200 reported cases. Patients present with multiple blue to violaceous compressible nodules that feel rubbery in consistency and may be painful with compression. Lesions may be up to 5 cm in diameter and with time, the GI tract may also become involved.⁹ In the GI tract, the small bowel is the most common site of involvement and patients may present with severe iron deficiency anemia due to hemorrhage.¹⁰ Histopathologic features are nonspecific and have features of venous malformations but may include large, tortuous, dilated vessels with a single endothelial lining with possible smooth muscle in vessel walls or calcifications.¹¹ Due to concerns of BRBNS, laboratory studies (CBC and FOBT) were obtained but did not indicate the patient was experiencing a GI hemorrhage.

The differential diagnosis included Maffucci syndrome, also known as dyschondrodysplasia with hemangiomas, enchondromatosis with cavernous hemangiomas, or hemangiomatosis chondrodystrophic. Patients with Maffucci syndrome present with multiple enchondromas, soft tissue hemangiomas or lymphangiomas, and gliomas. These lesions tend to undergo malignant transformation from enchondromas to chondrosarcomas and hemangiomas to vascular sarcomas.¹² This diagnosis was less likely in the patient in this case as there were no concerns of skeletal involvement upon history and physical examination.

Lastly, Klippel-Trénaunay syndrome can be associated with similar cutaneous vascular manifestations.^13,14 This syndrome occurs due to somatic mutations altering angiogenesis during embryological development. This results in varicosities of superficial and deep venous systems, persistent embryonic veins, and valvular incompetence. However, these patients typically have capillary manifestations such as a flat, red, or purple port-wine stain present at birth and associated limb hypertrophy predominantly affecting a single lower limb.^15,16 The patient reported not having the lesions present at birth and because bilateral upper/lower extremity and trunk involvement is rare in this syndrome, a Klippel-Trénaunay syndrome diagnosis was unlikely even in the absence of biopsy results.

Treatment

Based on pathology results, the patient was diagnosed with familial glomangiomatosis and a discussion of treatment options ensued. Asymptomatic lesions can be periodically managed. In addition, there are several treatments for symptomatic lesions. Symptomatic lesions may be tender to palpation and or hypersensitive to temperature change (cold). Though they exhibit slow growth, they can invade surrounding tissues including nerve sheaths which can worsen pain.

Surgical resection, sclerotherapy, laser therapy, and electron beam radiation have been used on patients with symptomatic lesions.^8,17 Sclerotherapy involves introducing sterile solutions into a blood vessel’s lumen or into the vascular lesion itself to induce permanent endofibrosis and ablation.¹⁷ Hypertonic saline, sodium tetradecyl sulfate (STS), and absolute alcohol have been used to treat vascular anomalies as well as glomangiomas.¹⁷ Though case reports have noticed significant improvement in symptomatic lesions, sclerotherapy has been shown to be more effective in treating venous malformations than glomangiomas.^18,19

A long-pulsed 1064-nm neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser has also been effective in treating larger glomangiomas that would otherwise be difficult to excise.²⁰ The Nd:YAG laser has successfully treated lesions in patients with familial glomangiomatosis.^21,22

Our patient opted for sclerotherapy with STS on symptomatic lesions of the bilateral upper extremities and trunk. The patient reported moderate improvement of some lesions at a 4-week follow-up appointment and sclerotherapy with STS was repeated.

It is important to note that if a glomangioma is fully excised, the prognosis is favorable; however, recurrence after surgical excision is seen in 10% to 33% of cases.^23,24 Our patient had symptomatic lesions excised on the face, but they recurred. Glomangiomas confer a low risk of malignancy but some risk factors include lesions > 2 cm in size, deep lesions, muscle and/or bone invasion, and high mitotic activity.^17,25 If left untreated, high-risk glomangiomas can potentially be life-threatening due to growth, bleeding, or vital organ obstruction.²⁶

Primary Care Role

This patient was referred by his PCP assuming that these were symptomatic vascular lesions or telangiectasias (spider veins). Glomus cell tumors are classified as neurovascular neoplasms which may appear similar to vascular malformations or hemangiomas. ²⁷ PCPs serve an important role in performing cutaneous biopsies to increase patient access to dermatologic care, increase patient awareness of skin conditions including skin cancer, and to potentially diagnose a malignant lesion.²⁸ However, the PCP ultimately referred the patient to dermatology due to the number of growing, painful lesions. If the patient had a single lesion, it may have been appropriate to biopsy for diagnostic clarity.

A retrospective review found that the clinical diagnosis of glomus tumor showed concordance with histopathological diagnosis in 45.4% of cases. The most common alternate histopathological diagnoses were vascular tumors (25.9%) followed by other skin or soft tissue tumors like neuromas, leiomyomas, lipomas, or nevi.²⁹ Even if the PCP performed an initial biopsy with high clinical suspicion of a vascular malformation, some glomus cell tumors may be vascular tumors and vice versa.

Though the patient’s history was consistent with the classic triad of glomangiomas including hypersensitivity, intermittent pain, and pinpoint pain, histopathology was necessary to confirm the diagnosis. Given that these appeared to be similar to telangiectasias to the PCP, a rare condition like BRBNS was likely not considered upon initial presentation. Furthermore, the patient had a negative review of systems to include GI symptoms like melena or hematochezia. The PCP had no concern of GI hemorrhage as these lesions can involve the GI tract. If the patient were to endorse additional symptoms, a CBC to evaluate for anemia as well as a GI referral would be warranted.

CONCLUSIONS

This case exhibits the importance of differentiating glomus cell tumors from other more common vascular anomalies via a patient’s history and histopathological findings. Diagnosis and treatment may be difficult depending on the extent of lesions.

DISCUSSION

A diagnosis of familial glomangiomatosis was made based on the clinical history and histopathologic findings from the punch biopsy. Glomus tumors are comprised of glomus cells, or undifferentiated smooth muscle cells responsible for thermoregulation.¹ Glomus tumors are classified into 3 categories: solid (predominantly glomus cells), glomangiomas (predominantly blood vessels), and glomangiomyomas (predominantly smooth muscle cells).² Glomangiomas, which comprise up to 20% of glomus tumors, typically present as bluish-purple, papular or nodular, hyperkeratotic lesions that are 2 to 10 mm in diameter.¹ These lesions are tender to palpation and pain may worsen with exposure to cold. Glomangiomas are associated with a classic triad of symptoms that include hypersensitivity, intermittent pain, and pinpoint pain, but patients rarely present with all 3.³

Glomangiomas tend to occur in areas rich with glomus bodies—the distal extremities—specifically the palms, wrists, forearms, feet, and subungual regions; visceral organ involvement including the GI tract is very rare.^1,4,5 About 38% to 68% of these lesions are hereditary or can be sporadic. If these lesions are hereditary, a patient is said to have familial glomangiomatosis. In familial glomangiomatosis, the glomulin gene is mutated in an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern with incomplete penetrance and variable expressivity. Inherited glomangiomas may present at birth or puberty similar to other vascular anomalies.⁴

Histopathology of glomangiomas shows rows of glomus cells (modified smooth muscle cells) surrounding distorted venous channels.^6,7 These lesions stain positive for CD34, vimentin, calponin, and α-smooth muscle actin, but are negative for desmin, S-100, and von Willebrand factor.^1,8 Although the patient’s medical history and physical examination are important in establishing the diagnosis, histopathology is confirmatory.

While the punch biopsy results were pending, a complete blood count (CBC) and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) were ordered due to concerns for blue rubber bleb nevus syndrome (BRBNS), a rare disorder with about 200 reported cases. Patients present with multiple blue to violaceous compressible nodules that feel rubbery in consistency and may be painful with compression. Lesions may be up to 5 cm in diameter and with time, the GI tract may also become involved.⁹ In the GI tract, the small bowel is the most common site of involvement and patients may present with severe iron deficiency anemia due to hemorrhage.¹⁰ Histopathologic features are nonspecific and have features of venous malformations but may include large, tortuous, dilated vessels with a single endothelial lining with possible smooth muscle in vessel walls or calcifications.¹¹ Due to concerns of BRBNS, laboratory studies (CBC and FOBT) were obtained but did not indicate the patient was experiencing a GI hemorrhage.

The differential diagnosis included Maffucci syndrome, also known as dyschondrodysplasia with hemangiomas, enchondromatosis with cavernous hemangiomas, or hemangiomatosis chondrodystrophic. Patients with Maffucci syndrome present with multiple enchondromas, soft tissue hemangiomas or lymphangiomas, and gliomas. These lesions tend to undergo malignant transformation from enchondromas to chondrosarcomas and hemangiomas to vascular sarcomas.¹² This diagnosis was less likely in the patient in this case as there were no concerns of skeletal involvement upon history and physical examination.

Lastly, Klippel-Trénaunay syndrome can be associated with similar cutaneous vascular manifestations.^13,14 This syndrome occurs due to somatic mutations altering angiogenesis during embryological development. This results in varicosities of superficial and deep venous systems, persistent embryonic veins, and valvular incompetence. However, these patients typically have capillary manifestations such as a flat, red, or purple port-wine stain present at birth and associated limb hypertrophy predominantly affecting a single lower limb.^15,16 The patient reported not having the lesions present at birth and because bilateral upper/lower extremity and trunk involvement is rare in this syndrome, a Klippel-Trénaunay syndrome diagnosis was unlikely even in the absence of biopsy results.

Treatment

Based on pathology results, the patient was diagnosed with familial glomangiomatosis and a discussion of treatment options ensued. Asymptomatic lesions can be periodically managed. In addition, there are several treatments for symptomatic lesions. Symptomatic lesions may be tender to palpation and or hypersensitive to temperature change (cold). Though they exhibit slow growth, they can invade surrounding tissues including nerve sheaths which can worsen pain.

Surgical resection, sclerotherapy, laser therapy, and electron beam radiation have been used on patients with symptomatic lesions.^8,17 Sclerotherapy involves introducing sterile solutions into a blood vessel’s lumen or into the vascular lesion itself to induce permanent endofibrosis and ablation.¹⁷ Hypertonic saline, sodium tetradecyl sulfate (STS), and absolute alcohol have been used to treat vascular anomalies as well as glomangiomas.¹⁷ Though case reports have noticed significant improvement in symptomatic lesions, sclerotherapy has been shown to be more effective in treating venous malformations than glomangiomas.^18,19

A long-pulsed 1064-nm neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser has also been effective in treating larger glomangiomas that would otherwise be difficult to excise.²⁰ The Nd:YAG laser has successfully treated lesions in patients with familial glomangiomatosis.^21,22

Our patient opted for sclerotherapy with STS on symptomatic lesions of the bilateral upper extremities and trunk. The patient reported moderate improvement of some lesions at a 4-week follow-up appointment and sclerotherapy with STS was repeated.

It is important to note that if a glomangioma is fully excised, the prognosis is favorable; however, recurrence after surgical excision is seen in 10% to 33% of cases.^23,24 Our patient had symptomatic lesions excised on the face, but they recurred. Glomangiomas confer a low risk of malignancy but some risk factors include lesions > 2 cm in size, deep lesions, muscle and/or bone invasion, and high mitotic activity.^17,25 If left untreated, high-risk glomangiomas can potentially be life-threatening due to growth, bleeding, or vital organ obstruction.²⁶

Primary Care Role

This patient was referred by his PCP assuming that these were symptomatic vascular lesions or telangiectasias (spider veins). Glomus cell tumors are classified as neurovascular neoplasms which may appear similar to vascular malformations or hemangiomas. ²⁷ PCPs serve an important role in performing cutaneous biopsies to increase patient access to dermatologic care, increase patient awareness of skin conditions including skin cancer, and to potentially diagnose a malignant lesion.²⁸ However, the PCP ultimately referred the patient to dermatology due to the number of growing, painful lesions. If the patient had a single lesion, it may have been appropriate to biopsy for diagnostic clarity.

A retrospective review found that the clinical diagnosis of glomus tumor showed concordance with histopathological diagnosis in 45.4% of cases. The most common alternate histopathological diagnoses were vascular tumors (25.9%) followed by other skin or soft tissue tumors like neuromas, leiomyomas, lipomas, or nevi.²⁹ Even if the PCP performed an initial biopsy with high clinical suspicion of a vascular malformation, some glomus cell tumors may be vascular tumors and vice versa.

Though the patient’s history was consistent with the classic triad of glomangiomas including hypersensitivity, intermittent pain, and pinpoint pain, histopathology was necessary to confirm the diagnosis. Given that these appeared to be similar to telangiectasias to the PCP, a rare condition like BRBNS was likely not considered upon initial presentation. Furthermore, the patient had a negative review of systems to include GI symptoms like melena or hematochezia. The PCP had no concern of GI hemorrhage as these lesions can involve the GI tract. If the patient were to endorse additional symptoms, a CBC to evaluate for anemia as well as a GI referral would be warranted.

CONCLUSIONS

This case exhibits the importance of differentiating glomus cell tumors from other more common vascular anomalies via a patient’s history and histopathological findings. Diagnosis and treatment may be difficult depending on the extent of lesions.

To the Editor:

Alopecia areata (AA), an autoimmune disease characterized by inflammatory and nonscarring hair loss, can have a considerable impact on quality of life.¹ Baricitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor that recently was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment of severe AA in adult patients, becoming the only on-label treatment available.² So far, the most common adverse effects reported in phase 3 trials have been acne, upper respiratory tract infections, headaches, urinary tract infections, and elevated creatine kinase levels.³

At our trichology unit in the dermatology department of a Spanish tertiary-care hospital in Seville, we have successfully used baricitinib to treat 18 patients with severe, therapy-resistant AA. Herein, we present a case of trichilemmal cyst reactivation in one of our patients following successful treatment with baricitinib.

A 53-year-old woman with a history of trichilemmal cysts presented to the dermatology department with total body hair loss of 5 years' duration that was diagnosed as AA universalis (Figure, A). The patient reported that the trichilemmal cysts had shrunk drastically 1 month after complete loss of body hair (Severity of Alopecia Tool [SALT] score, 100)(Figure, B). The largest cyst was surgically removed, and the diagnosis was histologically confirmed by a pathologist. Her mother and sister also had a history of multiple trichilemmal cysts.

The patient previously had failed treatment with oral prednisone 50 mg/d, oral cyclosporine 4 mg/kg/d, oral dexamethasone 4 mg twice weekly, and oral azathioprine 300 mg/wk. Due to the new indication of baricitinib for AA, we opted to start the patient on oral baricitinib 4 mg/d. By week 8 of treatment, she had achieved total hair regrowth (SALT score, 0). This rapid response might indicate a quick-responder phenotype, referring to a subset of patients who exhibit a fast and robust response to treatment (SALT90), generally before week 16, although more evidence is needed.

Notably, we observed the reactivation of 4 trichilemmal cysts on the scalp 6 weeks after starting baricitinib. To our knowledge, this side effect has not previously been reported. We hypothesize that reactivation of the cysts may have been due to the inhibition of the Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway, which reduces the effects of cytokines and leads to reactivation of hair follicles that were inactive because of inflammation.⁴ As a result, the outer root sheath of the hair follicle can once again be filled with keratin, thereby reactivating the trichilemmal cysts. Based on our experience with this case, it may be relevant to consider personal and family history of trichilemmal cysts before starting treatment with baricitinib for AA and advise the patient about the possibility of this adverse effect.

To the Editor:

Alopecia areata (AA), an autoimmune disease characterized by inflammatory and nonscarring hair loss, can have a considerable impact on quality of life.¹ Baricitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor that recently was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment of severe AA in adult patients, becoming the only on-label treatment available.² So far, the most common adverse effects reported in phase 3 trials have been acne, upper respiratory tract infections, headaches, urinary tract infections, and elevated creatine kinase levels.³

At our trichology unit in the dermatology department of a Spanish tertiary-care hospital in Seville, we have successfully used baricitinib to treat 18 patients with severe, therapy-resistant AA. Herein, we present a case of trichilemmal cyst reactivation in one of our patients following successful treatment with baricitinib.

A 53-year-old woman with a history of trichilemmal cysts presented to the dermatology department with total body hair loss of 5 years' duration that was diagnosed as AA universalis (Figure, A). The patient reported that the trichilemmal cysts had shrunk drastically 1 month after complete loss of body hair (Severity of Alopecia Tool [SALT] score, 100)(Figure, B). The largest cyst was surgically removed, and the diagnosis was histologically confirmed by a pathologist. Her mother and sister also had a history of multiple trichilemmal cysts.

The patient previously had failed treatment with oral prednisone 50 mg/d, oral cyclosporine 4 mg/kg/d, oral dexamethasone 4 mg twice weekly, and oral azathioprine 300 mg/wk. Due to the new indication of baricitinib for AA, we opted to start the patient on oral baricitinib 4 mg/d. By week 8 of treatment, she had achieved total hair regrowth (SALT score, 0). This rapid response might indicate a quick-responder phenotype, referring to a subset of patients who exhibit a fast and robust response to treatment (SALT90), generally before week 16, although more evidence is needed.

Notably, we observed the reactivation of 4 trichilemmal cysts on the scalp 6 weeks after starting baricitinib. To our knowledge, this side effect has not previously been reported. We hypothesize that reactivation of the cysts may have been due to the inhibition of the Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway, which reduces the effects of cytokines and leads to reactivation of hair follicles that were inactive because of inflammation.⁴ As a result, the outer root sheath of the hair follicle can once again be filled with keratin, thereby reactivating the trichilemmal cysts. Based on our experience with this case, it may be relevant to consider personal and family history of trichilemmal cysts before starting treatment with baricitinib for AA and advise the patient about the possibility of this adverse effect.

To the Editor:

Alopecia areata (AA), an autoimmune disease characterized by inflammatory and nonscarring hair loss, can have a considerable impact on quality of life.¹ Baricitinib is a Janus kinase inhibitor that recently was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment of severe AA in adult patients, becoming the only on-label treatment available.² So far, the most common adverse effects reported in phase 3 trials have been acne, upper respiratory tract infections, headaches, urinary tract infections, and elevated creatine kinase levels.³

At our trichology unit in the dermatology department of a Spanish tertiary-care hospital in Seville, we have successfully used baricitinib to treat 18 patients with severe, therapy-resistant AA. Herein, we present a case of trichilemmal cyst reactivation in one of our patients following successful treatment with baricitinib.

A 53-year-old woman with a history of trichilemmal cysts presented to the dermatology department with total body hair loss of 5 years' duration that was diagnosed as AA universalis (Figure, A). The patient reported that the trichilemmal cysts had shrunk drastically 1 month after complete loss of body hair (Severity of Alopecia Tool [SALT] score, 100)(Figure, B). The largest cyst was surgically removed, and the diagnosis was histologically confirmed by a pathologist. Her mother and sister also had a history of multiple trichilemmal cysts.

The patient previously had failed treatment with oral prednisone 50 mg/d, oral cyclosporine 4 mg/kg/d, oral dexamethasone 4 mg twice weekly, and oral azathioprine 300 mg/wk. Due to the new indication of baricitinib for AA, we opted to start the patient on oral baricitinib 4 mg/d. By week 8 of treatment, she had achieved total hair regrowth (SALT score, 0). This rapid response might indicate a quick-responder phenotype, referring to a subset of patients who exhibit a fast and robust response to treatment (SALT90), generally before week 16, although more evidence is needed.

Notably, we observed the reactivation of 4 trichilemmal cysts on the scalp 6 weeks after starting baricitinib. To our knowledge, this side effect has not previously been reported. We hypothesize that reactivation of the cysts may have been due to the inhibition of the Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway, which reduces the effects of cytokines and leads to reactivation of hair follicles that were inactive because of inflammation.⁴ As a result, the outer root sheath of the hair follicle can once again be filled with keratin, thereby reactivating the trichilemmal cysts. Based on our experience with this case, it may be relevant to consider personal and family history of trichilemmal cysts before starting treatment with baricitinib for AA and advise the patient about the possibility of this adverse effect.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a relatively common inherited condition characterized by abnormal asymmetric left ventricular (LV) thickening. This can lead to LV outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction, which has important implications for anesthesia management. This article describes a case of previously undiagnosed HCM discovered during a preoperative physical examination prior to a routine surveillance colonoscopy.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 55-year-old Army veteran with a history of a sessile serrated colon adenoma presented to the preadmission testing clinic prior to planned surveillance colonoscopy under monitored anesthesia care. His medical history included untreated severe obstructive sleep apnea (53 apnea-hypopnea index score), diet-controlled hypertension, prediabetes (6.3% hemoglobin A_1c), hypogonadism, and obesity (41 body mass index). Medications included semaglutide 1.7 mg injected subcutaneously weekly and testosterone 200 mg injected intramuscularly every 2 weeks, as well as lisinopril-hydrochlorothiazide 10 to 12.5 mg daily, which had recently been discontinued because his blood pressure had improved with a low-sodium diet.

A review of systems was unremarkable except for progressive weight gain. The patient had no family history of sudden cardiac death. On physical examination, the patient’s blood pressure was 119/81 mm Hg, pulse was 86 beats/min, and respiratory rate was 18 breaths/min. The patient was clinically euvolemic, with no jugular venous distention or peripheral edema, and his lungs were clear to auscultation. There was, however, a soft, nonradiating grade 2/6 systolic murmur that had not been previously documented. The murmur decreased substantially with the Valsalva maneuver, with no change in hand grip.

Laboratory studies revealed hemoglobin and renal function were within the reference range. A routine 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) was unremarkable. A transthoracic echocardiogram revealed moderate pulmonary hypertension (59 mm Hg right ventricular systolic pressure), asymmetric LV hypertrophy (2.1 cm septal thickness), and severe LVOT obstruction (131.8 mm Hg gradient). Severe systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve was also present. The LV ejection fraction was 60% to 65%, with normal cavity size and systolic function. These findings were consistent with severe hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM). Upon more detailed questioning, the patient reported that over the previous 5 years he had experienced gradually decreasing exercise tolerance and mild dyspnea on exertion, particularly in hot weather, which he attributed to weight gain. He also reported a presyncopal episode the previous month while working in his garage in hot weather for a prolonged period of time.

The patient’s elective colonoscopy was canceled, and he was referred to cardiology. While awaiting cardiac consultation, he was instructed to maintain good hydration and avoid any heavy physical activity beyond walking. He was told not to resume his use of lisinopril-hydrochlorothiazide. A screening 7-day Holter monitor showed no ventricular or supraventricular ectopy. After cardiology consultation, the patient was referred to a HCM specialty clinic, where a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging confirmed severe asymmetric hypertrophy with resting obstruction (Figures 1-4). Treatment options were discussed with the patient, and he underwent a trial with the Β—blocker metoprolol 50 mg daily, which he could not tolerate. Verapamil extended-release 180 mg orally once daily was then initiated; however, his dyspnea persisted. He was amenable to surgical therapy and underwent septal myectomy, with 12 g of septal myocardium removed. He did well postoperatively, with a follow-up echocardiogram showing normal LV systolic function and no LVOT gradient detectable at rest or with Valsalva maneuver. His fatigue and exertional dyspnea significantly improved. Once the patient underwent septal myectomy and was determined to have no detectable LVOT gradient, he was approved for colonoscopy which has been scheduled but not completed.

DISCUSSION

Once thought rare, HCM is now considered to be a relatively common inherited disorder, occurring in about 1 in 500 persons, with some suggesting that the actual prevalence is closer to 1 in 200 persons.^1,2 Most often caused by mutations in ≥ 1 of 11 genes responsible for encoding cardiac sarcomere proteins, HCM is characterized by abnormal LV thickening without chamber enlargement in the absence of any identifiable cause, such as aortic valve stenosis or uncontrolled hypertension. The hypertrophy is often asymmetric, and in cases of asymmetric septal hypertrophy, dynamic LVOT obstruction can occur (known as HOCM). The condition is inherited in an autosomal dominant pattern with variable expression and is associated with myocardial fiber disarray, which can occur years before symptom onset.³ This myocardial disarray can lead to remodeling and an increased wall-to-lumen ratio of the coronary arteries, resulting in impaired coronary reserve.

Depending on the degree of LVOT obstruction, patients with HCM may be classified as nonobstructive, labile, or obstructive at rest. Patients without obstruction have an outflow gradient ≤ 30 mm Hg that is not provoked with Valsalva maneuver, administration of amyl nitrite, or exercise treadmill testing.³ Patients classified as labile do not have LVOT obstruction at rest, but obstruction may be induced by provocative measures. Finally, about one-third of patients with HCM will have LVOT gradients of > 30 mm Hg at rest. These patients are at increased risk for progression to symptomatic heart failure and may be candidates for surgical myectomy or catheter-based alcohol septal ablation.⁴ The patient in this case had a resting LVOT gradient of 131.8 mm Hg on echocardiography. The magnitude of this gradient placed the patient at a significantly higher risk of ventricular dysrhythmias and sudden cardiac death.⁵

Wall thickness also has prognostic implications. ⁶ Although any area of the myocardium can be affected, the septum is involved in about 90% cases. In their series of 48 patients followed over 6.5 years, Spirito et al found that the risk of sudden death in patients with HCM increased as wall thickness increased. For patients with a wall thickness of < 15 mm, the risk of death was 0 per 1000 person-years; however, this increased to 18.2 per 1000 person-years for patients with a wall thickness of > 30 mm.⁷

While many patients with HCM are asymptomatic, others may report dyspnea on exertion, orthopnea, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, chest pain, palpitations, presyncope/ syncope, postural lightheadedness, fatigue, or edema. Symptomatology, however, is quite variable and does not necessarily correlate with the degree of outflow obstruction. Surprisingly, some patients with significant LVOT may have minimal symptoms, such as the patient in this case, while others with a lesser degree of LVOT obstruction may be very symptomatic.^3,4

Physical examination of a patient with HCM may be normal or may reveal nonspecific findings such as a fourth heart sound or a systolic murmur. In general, physical examination abnormalities are related to LVOT obstruction. Those patients without significant outflow obstruction may have a normal cardiac examination. While patients with HCM may have a variety of systolic murmurs, the 2 most common are those related to outflow tract obstruction and mitral regurgitation caused by systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve.⁴ The systolic murmur associated with significant LVOT obstruction has been described as a harsh, crescendo-decrescendo type that begins just after S1 and is heard best at the apex and lower left sternal border.⁴ It may radiate to the axilla and base but not generally into the neck. The murmur usually increases with Valsalva maneuver and decreases with handgrip or going from a standing to a sitting/ squatting position. The initial examination of the patient in this case was not suggestive of HOCM, as confirmed by 2 practitioners (a cardiologist and an internist), each with > 30 years of clinical experience. This may have been related to the patient’s hydration status at the time, with Valsalva maneuver increasing obstruction to the point of reduced flow.

About 90% of patients with HCM will have abnormalities on ECG, most commonly LV hypertrophy with a strain pattern. Other ECG findings include: (1) prominent abnormal Q waves, particularly in the inferior (II, III, and aVF) and lateral leads (I, aVL, and V4-V6), reflecting depolarization of a hypertrophied septum; (2) left axis deviation; (3) deeply inverted T waves in leads V2 through V4; and (4) P wave abnormalities indicative of left atrial (LA) or biatrial enlargement. ⁸ It is notable that the patient in this case had a normal ECG, given that a minority of patients with HCM have been shown to have a normal ECG.⁹

Echocardiography plays an important role in diagnosing HCM. Diagnostic criteria include the presence of asymmetric hypertrophy (most commonly with anterior septal involvement), systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve, a nondilated LV cavity, septal immobility, and premature closure of the aortic valve. LV thickness is measured at both the septum and free wall; values ≥ 15 mm, with a septal-to-free wall thickness ratio of ≥ 1.3, are suggestive of HCM. Asymmetric LV hypertrophy can also be seen in other segments besides the septum, such as the apex.¹⁰

HCM/HOCM is the most common cause of sudden cardiac death in young people. The condition also contributes to significant functional morbidity due to heart failure and increases the risk of atrial fibrillation and subsequent stroke. Treatments tend to focus on symptom relief and slowing disease progression and include the use of medications such as Β—blockers, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and the myosin inhibitor mavacamten.¹¹ Select patients, such as those with severe LVOT obstruction and symptoms despite treatment with Β—blockers or nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, may be offered septal myectomy or catheter-based alcohol septal ablation, coupled with insertion of an implantable cardiac defibrillator to prevent sudden cardiac death in patients at high arrhythmic risk.^1,12

Patients with HCM, particularly those with LVOT obstruction, pose distinct challenges to the anesthesiologist because they are highly sensitive to decreases in preload and afterload. These patients frequently experience adverse perioperative events such as myocardial ischemia, systemic hypotension, and supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias. Acute congestive heart failure may also occur, presumably due to concomitant diastolic dysfunction. Patients with previously unrecognized HCM are of particular concern, as they may manifest unexpected and sudden hypotension with the induction of anesthesia. There may then be a paradoxical response to vasoactive drugs and anesthetic agents, which accentuate LVOT obstruction. In these circumstances, undiagnosed HCM should be considered, and intraoperative rescue transesophageal echocardiography be performed.¹³ Once the diagnosis is confirmed, efforts should be made to reduce myocardial contractility and sympathetic discharge (eg, with Β—blockers), increase afterload (eg, with α1 agonists), and improve preload with adequate hydration. Proper resuscitation of hypotensive patients with HCM requires a thorough understanding of disease pathology, as effective interventions may seem to be counterintuitive. Inotropic agents such as epinephrine are contraindicated in HCM because increased inotropy and chronotropy worsen LVOT obstruction. Volume status is often tenuous; while adequate preload is important, overly aggressive fluid resuscitation may promote heart failure. It is important to keep in mind that even patients without resting LVOT obstruction may develop dynamic obstruction with anesthesia induction due to sudden reductions in preload and afterload. It is also important to note that the degree of LV hypertrophy is directly correlated with arrhythmic sudden death. Those patients with LV wall thickness ≥ 30 mm are at increased risk for potentially lethal tachyarrhythmias in the operating room.¹⁴

These considerations reinforce the need for proper preoperative identification of patients with HCM. Heightened awareness is key, given the fact that HCM is relatively common and tends to be underdiagnosed in the general population. These patients are generally young, otherwise healthy, and often undergo minor operative procedures in outpatient settings. It is incumbent upon the preoperative evaluator to take a thorough medical history and perform a careful physical examination. Clues to the diagnosis include exertional dyspnea, fatigue, angina, syncope/presyncope, or a family history of sudden cardiac death or HCM. A systolic ejection murmur, particularly one that increases with standing or Valsalva maneuver, and decreases with squatting or handgrip may also raise clinical suspicion. These patients should undergo a full cardiac evaluation, including echocardiography.

CONCLUSIONS

HCM is a common condition that is important to diagnose in the preoperative clinic. Failure to do so can lead to catastrophic complications during induction of anesthesia due to the sudden reduction in preload and afterload, which may cause a significant increase in LVOT obstruction. A high index of suspicion is essential, as clinical diagnosis can be challenging. The physical examination may be deceiving and symptoms are often subtle and nonspecific. It is imperative to alert the anesthesiologist before surgery so the complex hemodynamic management of patients with HOCM can be appropriately managed.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a relatively common inherited condition characterized by abnormal asymmetric left ventricular (LV) thickening. This can lead to LV outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction, which has important implications for anesthesia management. This article describes a case of previously undiagnosed HCM discovered during a preoperative physical examination prior to a routine surveillance colonoscopy.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 55-year-old Army veteran with a history of a sessile serrated colon adenoma presented to the preadmission testing clinic prior to planned surveillance colonoscopy under monitored anesthesia care. His medical history included untreated severe obstructive sleep apnea (53 apnea-hypopnea index score), diet-controlled hypertension, prediabetes (6.3% hemoglobin A_1c), hypogonadism, and obesity (41 body mass index). Medications included semaglutide 1.7 mg injected subcutaneously weekly and testosterone 200 mg injected intramuscularly every 2 weeks, as well as lisinopril-hydrochlorothiazide 10 to 12.5 mg daily, which had recently been discontinued because his blood pressure had improved with a low-sodium diet.

A review of systems was unremarkable except for progressive weight gain. The patient had no family history of sudden cardiac death. On physical examination, the patient’s blood pressure was 119/81 mm Hg, pulse was 86 beats/min, and respiratory rate was 18 breaths/min. The patient was clinically euvolemic, with no jugular venous distention or peripheral edema, and his lungs were clear to auscultation. There was, however, a soft, nonradiating grade 2/6 systolic murmur that had not been previously documented. The murmur decreased substantially with the Valsalva maneuver, with no change in hand grip.

Laboratory studies revealed hemoglobin and renal function were within the reference range. A routine 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) was unremarkable. A transthoracic echocardiogram revealed moderate pulmonary hypertension (59 mm Hg right ventricular systolic pressure), asymmetric LV hypertrophy (2.1 cm septal thickness), and severe LVOT obstruction (131.8 mm Hg gradient). Severe systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve was also present. The LV ejection fraction was 60% to 65%, with normal cavity size and systolic function. These findings were consistent with severe hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM). Upon more detailed questioning, the patient reported that over the previous 5 years he had experienced gradually decreasing exercise tolerance and mild dyspnea on exertion, particularly in hot weather, which he attributed to weight gain. He also reported a presyncopal episode the previous month while working in his garage in hot weather for a prolonged period of time.

The patient’s elective colonoscopy was canceled, and he was referred to cardiology. While awaiting cardiac consultation, he was instructed to maintain good hydration and avoid any heavy physical activity beyond walking. He was told not to resume his use of lisinopril-hydrochlorothiazide. A screening 7-day Holter monitor showed no ventricular or supraventricular ectopy. After cardiology consultation, the patient was referred to a HCM specialty clinic, where a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging confirmed severe asymmetric hypertrophy with resting obstruction (Figures 1-4). Treatment options were discussed with the patient, and he underwent a trial with the Β—blocker metoprolol 50 mg daily, which he could not tolerate. Verapamil extended-release 180 mg orally once daily was then initiated; however, his dyspnea persisted. He was amenable to surgical therapy and underwent septal myectomy, with 12 g of septal myocardium removed. He did well postoperatively, with a follow-up echocardiogram showing normal LV systolic function and no LVOT gradient detectable at rest or with Valsalva maneuver. His fatigue and exertional dyspnea significantly improved. Once the patient underwent septal myectomy and was determined to have no detectable LVOT gradient, he was approved for colonoscopy which has been scheduled but not completed.

DISCUSSION

Once thought rare, HCM is now considered to be a relatively common inherited disorder, occurring in about 1 in 500 persons, with some suggesting that the actual prevalence is closer to 1 in 200 persons.^1,2 Most often caused by mutations in ≥ 1 of 11 genes responsible for encoding cardiac sarcomere proteins, HCM is characterized by abnormal LV thickening without chamber enlargement in the absence of any identifiable cause, such as aortic valve stenosis or uncontrolled hypertension. The hypertrophy is often asymmetric, and in cases of asymmetric septal hypertrophy, dynamic LVOT obstruction can occur (known as HOCM). The condition is inherited in an autosomal dominant pattern with variable expression and is associated with myocardial fiber disarray, which can occur years before symptom onset.³ This myocardial disarray can lead to remodeling and an increased wall-to-lumen ratio of the coronary arteries, resulting in impaired coronary reserve.

Depending on the degree of LVOT obstruction, patients with HCM may be classified as nonobstructive, labile, or obstructive at rest. Patients without obstruction have an outflow gradient ≤ 30 mm Hg that is not provoked with Valsalva maneuver, administration of amyl nitrite, or exercise treadmill testing.³ Patients classified as labile do not have LVOT obstruction at rest, but obstruction may be induced by provocative measures. Finally, about one-third of patients with HCM will have LVOT gradients of > 30 mm Hg at rest. These patients are at increased risk for progression to symptomatic heart failure and may be candidates for surgical myectomy or catheter-based alcohol septal ablation.⁴ The patient in this case had a resting LVOT gradient of 131.8 mm Hg on echocardiography. The magnitude of this gradient placed the patient at a significantly higher risk of ventricular dysrhythmias and sudden cardiac death.⁵

Wall thickness also has prognostic implications. ⁶ Although any area of the myocardium can be affected, the septum is involved in about 90% cases. In their series of 48 patients followed over 6.5 years, Spirito et al found that the risk of sudden death in patients with HCM increased as wall thickness increased. For patients with a wall thickness of < 15 mm, the risk of death was 0 per 1000 person-years; however, this increased to 18.2 per 1000 person-years for patients with a wall thickness of > 30 mm.⁷

While many patients with HCM are asymptomatic, others may report dyspnea on exertion, orthopnea, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, chest pain, palpitations, presyncope/ syncope, postural lightheadedness, fatigue, or edema. Symptomatology, however, is quite variable and does not necessarily correlate with the degree of outflow obstruction. Surprisingly, some patients with significant LVOT may have minimal symptoms, such as the patient in this case, while others with a lesser degree of LVOT obstruction may be very symptomatic.^3,4

Physical examination of a patient with HCM may be normal or may reveal nonspecific findings such as a fourth heart sound or a systolic murmur. In general, physical examination abnormalities are related to LVOT obstruction. Those patients without significant outflow obstruction may have a normal cardiac examination. While patients with HCM may have a variety of systolic murmurs, the 2 most common are those related to outflow tract obstruction and mitral regurgitation caused by systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve.⁴ The systolic murmur associated with significant LVOT obstruction has been described as a harsh, crescendo-decrescendo type that begins just after S1 and is heard best at the apex and lower left sternal border.⁴ It may radiate to the axilla and base but not generally into the neck. The murmur usually increases with Valsalva maneuver and decreases with handgrip or going from a standing to a sitting/ squatting position. The initial examination of the patient in this case was not suggestive of HOCM, as confirmed by 2 practitioners (a cardiologist and an internist), each with > 30 years of clinical experience. This may have been related to the patient’s hydration status at the time, with Valsalva maneuver increasing obstruction to the point of reduced flow.

About 90% of patients with HCM will have abnormalities on ECG, most commonly LV hypertrophy with a strain pattern. Other ECG findings include: (1) prominent abnormal Q waves, particularly in the inferior (II, III, and aVF) and lateral leads (I, aVL, and V4-V6), reflecting depolarization of a hypertrophied septum; (2) left axis deviation; (3) deeply inverted T waves in leads V2 through V4; and (4) P wave abnormalities indicative of left atrial (LA) or biatrial enlargement. ⁸ It is notable that the patient in this case had a normal ECG, given that a minority of patients with HCM have been shown to have a normal ECG.⁹

Echocardiography plays an important role in diagnosing HCM. Diagnostic criteria include the presence of asymmetric hypertrophy (most commonly with anterior septal involvement), systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve, a nondilated LV cavity, septal immobility, and premature closure of the aortic valve. LV thickness is measured at both the septum and free wall; values ≥ 15 mm, with a septal-to-free wall thickness ratio of ≥ 1.3, are suggestive of HCM. Asymmetric LV hypertrophy can also be seen in other segments besides the septum, such as the apex.¹⁰

HCM/HOCM is the most common cause of sudden cardiac death in young people. The condition also contributes to significant functional morbidity due to heart failure and increases the risk of atrial fibrillation and subsequent stroke. Treatments tend to focus on symptom relief and slowing disease progression and include the use of medications such as Β—blockers, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and the myosin inhibitor mavacamten.¹¹ Select patients, such as those with severe LVOT obstruction and symptoms despite treatment with Β—blockers or nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, may be offered septal myectomy or catheter-based alcohol septal ablation, coupled with insertion of an implantable cardiac defibrillator to prevent sudden cardiac death in patients at high arrhythmic risk.^1,12

Patients with HCM, particularly those with LVOT obstruction, pose distinct challenges to the anesthesiologist because they are highly sensitive to decreases in preload and afterload. These patients frequently experience adverse perioperative events such as myocardial ischemia, systemic hypotension, and supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias. Acute congestive heart failure may also occur, presumably due to concomitant diastolic dysfunction. Patients with previously unrecognized HCM are of particular concern, as they may manifest unexpected and sudden hypotension with the induction of anesthesia. There may then be a paradoxical response to vasoactive drugs and anesthetic agents, which accentuate LVOT obstruction. In these circumstances, undiagnosed HCM should be considered, and intraoperative rescue transesophageal echocardiography be performed.¹³ Once the diagnosis is confirmed, efforts should be made to reduce myocardial contractility and sympathetic discharge (eg, with Β—blockers), increase afterload (eg, with α1 agonists), and improve preload with adequate hydration. Proper resuscitation of hypotensive patients with HCM requires a thorough understanding of disease pathology, as effective interventions may seem to be counterintuitive. Inotropic agents such as epinephrine are contraindicated in HCM because increased inotropy and chronotropy worsen LVOT obstruction. Volume status is often tenuous; while adequate preload is important, overly aggressive fluid resuscitation may promote heart failure. It is important to keep in mind that even patients without resting LVOT obstruction may develop dynamic obstruction with anesthesia induction due to sudden reductions in preload and afterload. It is also important to note that the degree of LV hypertrophy is directly correlated with arrhythmic sudden death. Those patients with LV wall thickness ≥ 30 mm are at increased risk for potentially lethal tachyarrhythmias in the operating room.¹⁴

These considerations reinforce the need for proper preoperative identification of patients with HCM. Heightened awareness is key, given the fact that HCM is relatively common and tends to be underdiagnosed in the general population. These patients are generally young, otherwise healthy, and often undergo minor operative procedures in outpatient settings. It is incumbent upon the preoperative evaluator to take a thorough medical history and perform a careful physical examination. Clues to the diagnosis include exertional dyspnea, fatigue, angina, syncope/presyncope, or a family history of sudden cardiac death or HCM. A systolic ejection murmur, particularly one that increases with standing or Valsalva maneuver, and decreases with squatting or handgrip may also raise clinical suspicion. These patients should undergo a full cardiac evaluation, including echocardiography.

CONCLUSIONS

HCM is a common condition that is important to diagnose in the preoperative clinic. Failure to do so can lead to catastrophic complications during induction of anesthesia due to the sudden reduction in preload and afterload, which may cause a significant increase in LVOT obstruction. A high index of suspicion is essential, as clinical diagnosis can be challenging. The physical examination may be deceiving and symptoms are often subtle and nonspecific. It is imperative to alert the anesthesiologist before surgery so the complex hemodynamic management of patients with HOCM can be appropriately managed.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a relatively common inherited condition characterized by abnormal asymmetric left ventricular (LV) thickening. This can lead to LV outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction, which has important implications for anesthesia management. This article describes a case of previously undiagnosed HCM discovered during a preoperative physical examination prior to a routine surveillance colonoscopy.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 55-year-old Army veteran with a history of a sessile serrated colon adenoma presented to the preadmission testing clinic prior to planned surveillance colonoscopy under monitored anesthesia care. His medical history included untreated severe obstructive sleep apnea (53 apnea-hypopnea index score), diet-controlled hypertension, prediabetes (6.3% hemoglobin A_1c), hypogonadism, and obesity (41 body mass index). Medications included semaglutide 1.7 mg injected subcutaneously weekly and testosterone 200 mg injected intramuscularly every 2 weeks, as well as lisinopril-hydrochlorothiazide 10 to 12.5 mg daily, which had recently been discontinued because his blood pressure had improved with a low-sodium diet.

A review of systems was unremarkable except for progressive weight gain. The patient had no family history of sudden cardiac death. On physical examination, the patient’s blood pressure was 119/81 mm Hg, pulse was 86 beats/min, and respiratory rate was 18 breaths/min. The patient was clinically euvolemic, with no jugular venous distention or peripheral edema, and his lungs were clear to auscultation. There was, however, a soft, nonradiating grade 2/6 systolic murmur that had not been previously documented. The murmur decreased substantially with the Valsalva maneuver, with no change in hand grip.

Laboratory studies revealed hemoglobin and renal function were within the reference range. A routine 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) was unremarkable. A transthoracic echocardiogram revealed moderate pulmonary hypertension (59 mm Hg right ventricular systolic pressure), asymmetric LV hypertrophy (2.1 cm septal thickness), and severe LVOT obstruction (131.8 mm Hg gradient). Severe systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve was also present. The LV ejection fraction was 60% to 65%, with normal cavity size and systolic function. These findings were consistent with severe hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM). Upon more detailed questioning, the patient reported that over the previous 5 years he had experienced gradually decreasing exercise tolerance and mild dyspnea on exertion, particularly in hot weather, which he attributed to weight gain. He also reported a presyncopal episode the previous month while working in his garage in hot weather for a prolonged period of time.

The patient’s elective colonoscopy was canceled, and he was referred to cardiology. While awaiting cardiac consultation, he was instructed to maintain good hydration and avoid any heavy physical activity beyond walking. He was told not to resume his use of lisinopril-hydrochlorothiazide. A screening 7-day Holter monitor showed no ventricular or supraventricular ectopy. After cardiology consultation, the patient was referred to a HCM specialty clinic, where a cardiac magnetic resonance imaging confirmed severe asymmetric hypertrophy with resting obstruction (Figures 1-4). Treatment options were discussed with the patient, and he underwent a trial with the Β—blocker metoprolol 50 mg daily, which he could not tolerate. Verapamil extended-release 180 mg orally once daily was then initiated; however, his dyspnea persisted. He was amenable to surgical therapy and underwent septal myectomy, with 12 g of septal myocardium removed. He did well postoperatively, with a follow-up echocardiogram showing normal LV systolic function and no LVOT gradient detectable at rest or with Valsalva maneuver. His fatigue and exertional dyspnea significantly improved. Once the patient underwent septal myectomy and was determined to have no detectable LVOT gradient, he was approved for colonoscopy which has been scheduled but not completed.

DISCUSSION

Once thought rare, HCM is now considered to be a relatively common inherited disorder, occurring in about 1 in 500 persons, with some suggesting that the actual prevalence is closer to 1 in 200 persons.^1,2 Most often caused by mutations in ≥ 1 of 11 genes responsible for encoding cardiac sarcomere proteins, HCM is characterized by abnormal LV thickening without chamber enlargement in the absence of any identifiable cause, such as aortic valve stenosis or uncontrolled hypertension. The hypertrophy is often asymmetric, and in cases of asymmetric septal hypertrophy, dynamic LVOT obstruction can occur (known as HOCM). The condition is inherited in an autosomal dominant pattern with variable expression and is associated with myocardial fiber disarray, which can occur years before symptom onset.³ This myocardial disarray can lead to remodeling and an increased wall-to-lumen ratio of the coronary arteries, resulting in impaired coronary reserve.

Depending on the degree of LVOT obstruction, patients with HCM may be classified as nonobstructive, labile, or obstructive at rest. Patients without obstruction have an outflow gradient ≤ 30 mm Hg that is not provoked with Valsalva maneuver, administration of amyl nitrite, or exercise treadmill testing.³ Patients classified as labile do not have LVOT obstruction at rest, but obstruction may be induced by provocative measures. Finally, about one-third of patients with HCM will have LVOT gradients of > 30 mm Hg at rest. These patients are at increased risk for progression to symptomatic heart failure and may be candidates for surgical myectomy or catheter-based alcohol septal ablation.⁴ The patient in this case had a resting LVOT gradient of 131.8 mm Hg on echocardiography. The magnitude of this gradient placed the patient at a significantly higher risk of ventricular dysrhythmias and sudden cardiac death.⁵

Wall thickness also has prognostic implications. ⁶ Although any area of the myocardium can be affected, the septum is involved in about 90% cases. In their series of 48 patients followed over 6.5 years, Spirito et al found that the risk of sudden death in patients with HCM increased as wall thickness increased. For patients with a wall thickness of < 15 mm, the risk of death was 0 per 1000 person-years; however, this increased to 18.2 per 1000 person-years for patients with a wall thickness of > 30 mm.⁷

While many patients with HCM are asymptomatic, others may report dyspnea on exertion, orthopnea, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, chest pain, palpitations, presyncope/ syncope, postural lightheadedness, fatigue, or edema. Symptomatology, however, is quite variable and does not necessarily correlate with the degree of outflow obstruction. Surprisingly, some patients with significant LVOT may have minimal symptoms, such as the patient in this case, while others with a lesser degree of LVOT obstruction may be very symptomatic.^3,4

Physical examination of a patient with HCM may be normal or may reveal nonspecific findings such as a fourth heart sound or a systolic murmur. In general, physical examination abnormalities are related to LVOT obstruction. Those patients without significant outflow obstruction may have a normal cardiac examination. While patients with HCM may have a variety of systolic murmurs, the 2 most common are those related to outflow tract obstruction and mitral regurgitation caused by systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve.⁴ The systolic murmur associated with significant LVOT obstruction has been described as a harsh, crescendo-decrescendo type that begins just after S1 and is heard best at the apex and lower left sternal border.⁴ It may radiate to the axilla and base but not generally into the neck. The murmur usually increases with Valsalva maneuver and decreases with handgrip or going from a standing to a sitting/ squatting position. The initial examination of the patient in this case was not suggestive of HOCM, as confirmed by 2 practitioners (a cardiologist and an internist), each with > 30 years of clinical experience. This may have been related to the patient’s hydration status at the time, with Valsalva maneuver increasing obstruction to the point of reduced flow.

About 90% of patients with HCM will have abnormalities on ECG, most commonly LV hypertrophy with a strain pattern. Other ECG findings include: (1) prominent abnormal Q waves, particularly in the inferior (II, III, and aVF) and lateral leads (I, aVL, and V4-V6), reflecting depolarization of a hypertrophied septum; (2) left axis deviation; (3) deeply inverted T waves in leads V2 through V4; and (4) P wave abnormalities indicative of left atrial (LA) or biatrial enlargement. ⁸ It is notable that the patient in this case had a normal ECG, given that a minority of patients with HCM have been shown to have a normal ECG.⁹

Echocardiography plays an important role in diagnosing HCM. Diagnostic criteria include the presence of asymmetric hypertrophy (most commonly with anterior septal involvement), systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve, a nondilated LV cavity, septal immobility, and premature closure of the aortic valve. LV thickness is measured at both the septum and free wall; values ≥ 15 mm, with a septal-to-free wall thickness ratio of ≥ 1.3, are suggestive of HCM. Asymmetric LV hypertrophy can also be seen in other segments besides the septum, such as the apex.¹⁰

HCM/HOCM is the most common cause of sudden cardiac death in young people. The condition also contributes to significant functional morbidity due to heart failure and increases the risk of atrial fibrillation and subsequent stroke. Treatments tend to focus on symptom relief and slowing disease progression and include the use of medications such as Β—blockers, nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, and the myosin inhibitor mavacamten.¹¹ Select patients, such as those with severe LVOT obstruction and symptoms despite treatment with Β—blockers or nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers, may be offered septal myectomy or catheter-based alcohol septal ablation, coupled with insertion of an implantable cardiac defibrillator to prevent sudden cardiac death in patients at high arrhythmic risk.^1,12

Patients with HCM, particularly those with LVOT obstruction, pose distinct challenges to the anesthesiologist because they are highly sensitive to decreases in preload and afterload. These patients frequently experience adverse perioperative events such as myocardial ischemia, systemic hypotension, and supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias. Acute congestive heart failure may also occur, presumably due to concomitant diastolic dysfunction. Patients with previously unrecognized HCM are of particular concern, as they may manifest unexpected and sudden hypotension with the induction of anesthesia. There may then be a paradoxical response to vasoactive drugs and anesthetic agents, which accentuate LVOT obstruction. In these circumstances, undiagnosed HCM should be considered, and intraoperative rescue transesophageal echocardiography be performed.¹³ Once the diagnosis is confirmed, efforts should be made to reduce myocardial contractility and sympathetic discharge (eg, with Β—blockers), increase afterload (eg, with α1 agonists), and improve preload with adequate hydration. Proper resuscitation of hypotensive patients with HCM requires a thorough understanding of disease pathology, as effective interventions may seem to be counterintuitive. Inotropic agents such as epinephrine are contraindicated in HCM because increased inotropy and chronotropy worsen LVOT obstruction. Volume status is often tenuous; while adequate preload is important, overly aggressive fluid resuscitation may promote heart failure. It is important to keep in mind that even patients without resting LVOT obstruction may develop dynamic obstruction with anesthesia induction due to sudden reductions in preload and afterload. It is also important to note that the degree of LV hypertrophy is directly correlated with arrhythmic sudden death. Those patients with LV wall thickness ≥ 30 mm are at increased risk for potentially lethal tachyarrhythmias in the operating room.¹⁴

These considerations reinforce the need for proper preoperative identification of patients with HCM. Heightened awareness is key, given the fact that HCM is relatively common and tends to be underdiagnosed in the general population. These patients are generally young, otherwise healthy, and often undergo minor operative procedures in outpatient settings. It is incumbent upon the preoperative evaluator to take a thorough medical history and perform a careful physical examination. Clues to the diagnosis include exertional dyspnea, fatigue, angina, syncope/presyncope, or a family history of sudden cardiac death or HCM. A systolic ejection murmur, particularly one that increases with standing or Valsalva maneuver, and decreases with squatting or handgrip may also raise clinical suspicion. These patients should undergo a full cardiac evaluation, including echocardiography.

CONCLUSIONS

HCM is a common condition that is important to diagnose in the preoperative clinic. Failure to do so can lead to catastrophic complications during induction of anesthesia due to the sudden reduction in preload and afterload, which may cause a significant increase in LVOT obstruction. A high index of suspicion is essential, as clinical diagnosis can be challenging. The physical examination may be deceiving and symptoms are often subtle and nonspecific. It is imperative to alert the anesthesiologist before surgery so the complex hemodynamic management of patients with HOCM can be appropriately managed.