3.9 Article

Secondary Membranous Nephropathy Due to Benign Tumors in 2 Young Women: A Case Report

期刊

KIDNEY MEDICINE
卷 4, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.xkme.2021.10.010

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two young women in their 20s with antiphospholipase A2 receptor (anti-PLA(2)R)-negative membranous nephropathy (MN) were found to have benign tumors. Both women had no extrarenal symptoms and were previously healthy. Kidney biopsies showed MN without the presence of anti-PLA(2)R antibodies. Radioimaging revealed uterine leiomyoma and mesenteric fibromatosis in the two cases, respectively. The nephrotic syndrome remitted after tumor resection.
Membranous nephropathy (MN) is one of the most common causes of adult-onset nephrotic syndrome. We describe the cases of 2 young women in their 20s presenting with nephrotic syndrome due to antiphospholipase A2 receptor (anti-PLA(2)R)-negative MN, that was found to be associated with benign tumors. Both women had no extrarenal symptoms of a connective tissue disease, infection, or malignancy. They both had been previously healthy and were not receiving treatment with any drugs. Both had MN on kidney biopsy. Biopsies were negative for PLA(2)R antigen, and their serum did not demonstrate the presence of anti-PLA(2)R antibodies. Both were investigated for a secondary cause on the basis of negative anti-PLA(2)R serology and biopsy features supportive of secondary MN and were found to have benign tumors on radioimaging: a uterine leiomyoma and mesenteric fibromatosis, respectively. In both instances, the nephrotic syndrome remitted following resection of the tumors. To our knowledge, uterine leiomyoma and mesenteric fibromatosis have not previously been described in association with MN. These cases highlight the importance of pursuing a secondary cause of MN in patients without anti-PLA(2)R antibodies in serum or PLA(2)R antigen on kidney biopsy. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据