Article Text

Download PDFPDF
CASE REPORT
Nasal mucosal melanoma as a cause of epistaxis
  1. Ruqaiyah Behranwala1,
  2. Bhagya Harindi Loku Waduge1 and
  3. Bervin Teo2
  1. 1 Birmingham Medical School, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  2. 2 Acute Medical Unit, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Bervin Teo, bervinteo{at}yahoo.com

Abstract

A 43-year-old woman presented with an 8-week history of fatigue and recurrent right sided nasal bleeds progressing to significant pain and swelling on the right side of her face. Clinical examination revealed a friable mass in her right nasal passage. A biopsy and staging positron emission tomography-CT scan confirmed the diagnosis of a T4 N1 M1 BRAF wild type mucosal melanoma. The melanoma had metastasised to the right paranasal sinuses, right and left neck nodes, right submental node, right upper breast, liver, the subcutaneous fat of the left buttock and the right iliac bone as well as cerebral metastasis with further disease progression. Combination immunotherapy was started but initially suspended due to an adverse reaction to nivolumab and restarted in due course. Surgical debulking was carried out for symptomatic relief. This case report explores the delay in diagnosis of mucosal melanoma with its subsequent consequences and the lack of understanding of associated risk factors and optimal treatment.

  • dermatology
  • oncology
  • head and neck cancer
  • ear, nose and throat/otolaryngology

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors BT contributed in treating the patient and provided an outline of the manuscript. He gave the final approval. RB acquired the patient information and wrote the manuscript. BHLW proofread and edited the manuscript. All the authors have critically reviewed and approved the final draft of the manuscript. All authors agree to be accountable for the article and to ensure that all questions regarding the accuracy or integrity of the article are investigated and resolved.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Patient consent for publication Obtained.