Diagnosis: Intramuscular hydatid cyst. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed a multivesicular cyst located in the latissimus dorsi muscle (Figure 1); a hydatid cyst was suspected. The diagnosis was rapidly confirmed by a serologic test for Echinococcus granulosus (via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA], 71 kUA/L, and Western blot method, showing 1 specific band [7 KDa]). The patient was started on albendazole 1000 mg per day and referred to surgery. The mass was excised by muscle sparing and without any spillage of intracystic material. Perioperative macroscopical inspection showed multiple daughter vesicles of varying sizes (Figure 2), and parasitological examination confirmed the diagnosis of E. granulosus, with the presence of multiple scolices. During the postoperative course, the patient received 2 other courses of 1 month of albendazole, and serologic control showed a decrease in the ELISA titers, which became negative after 1 year. Hydatid disease is a zoonosis caused by the larval stages of E. granulosus, which is endemic in certain parts of the world [1]. Clinicians may be faced with imported cases in nonendemic regions. It is often underdiagnosed because of its asymptomatic development over the years. Parasitic etiology should be considered as a differential diagnosis of soft tissue tumor. Intramuscular hydatid cysts represent a rare presentation of this infection, which may be confused with other lesions such as tumors or may mimic other pathological processes. Clinicians must bear in mind the possibility of primary parasitic involvement at unusual sites [2–9]. Ultrasonography and MRI are useful in the diagnosis, showing the size, localization, and type of cyst with a sensitivity of 95%, and if vesicular fibrils are present, the sensitivity increases to 100% [10]. Serological tests can also be useful in the diagnosis but can sometimes give false-negative results [10]. To avoid dissemination of the cysts that can cause an anaphylactic shock, diagnosis puncture should not be performed. Surgery must be cautious; hypertonic saline solution must be spread on the cysts in case of rupture during surgery and adrenaline made available in case of anaphylactic shock.

Background Although some papers have analyzed patient satisfaction after traditional abdominoplasty, studies that have specifically assessed patient satisfaction on abdominal reconstruction after deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) surgery are lacking. Aim The aim of this study was to assess satisfaction, specifically for abdominoplasty results, in patients who underwent breast reconstruction with a single DIEP flap. Methods This retrospective study included 53 consecutive patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction with a DIEP flap. The patients were all clinically evaluated during a specific consultation and answered a satisfaction survey based on a four-point scale (unsatisfied, satisfied, happy, and very happy). Results A total of 50 patients responded to the survey. The average age was 52.3 years. This study revealed that 52% of the patients were happy or very happy with the aesthetic result of their abdomen. A total of 34% of the patients confessed that they preferred their abdomen before surgery. A further analysis of the dissatisfied patients showed particular dissatisfaction with dog-ears (50%), residual abdominal overhang (18%), or the horizontal scar (12%). The average distance between the horizontal scar and vulvar anterior commissure was 10.6 cm. A total of 86% of the patients were happy or very happy with the preoperative counseling. Conclusions The authors note the necessity to give detailed preoperative information to explain the final abdominal aesthetic result, which can be quite different from the patient's expectations.

Purpose. Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) is an increasingly studied technique. The authors of a meta-analysis published in 2012 had already confirmed the effectiveness of LLLT for radio-induced mucitis. Our purpose was to check its indication for similar pathologies.Material and methods. The articles were selected with the PubMed engine. The selected terms were "Low Level Laser Therapy", "oral surgery", "oral infection", "oral inflammation", "oral mucosal lesions", "oral mucosal disease", "stomatitis", "aphtous", "Herpes", "oral lichen planus", and "oral ulceration". The analysis was made on the following criteria: assessment criteria, methodological quality, and bias. We estimated the level of proof according to Sackett's modified score.Results. Six articles were selected. Two focused on the effectiveness of LLLT for Herpes simplex virus 1 oral symptoms. Two focused on the effectiveness of LLLT for oral lichen planus. One focused on the effectiveness of LLLT for recurrent aphthous stomatitis. The last one focused on the usefulness of LLLT to control stomatitis pain in the hand-foot-and-mouth disease.Conclusion. All the selected studies were assessed with a Sackett's score of IV. No study presented the required quality standards to recommend the treatment of LLLT for the selected indications. (C) 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

We report a case series of seven patients with bacterial cellulitis of the face complicating a filler injection for cosmetic reason, treated in a university hospital from 2005 to 2012. There were seven women aged 34 to 57 years. Two patients had a deep collection requiring surgical excision combined with antibiotics. Five patients were treated with antibiotics only. In two cases the bacteria was found streptococcus A and in one case Staphylococcus aureus. One patient required hospitalization in an intensive care unit. Only patients who needed surgical treatment showed moderate aesthetic sequelae. (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

Nous rapportons une série de sept cas de dermohypodermite bactérienne de la face compliquant une injection de produit de comblement à visée esthétique, pris en charge dans un centre hospitalo-universitaire de 2005 à 2012. Il s’agissait de sept patientes âgées de 34 à 57ans. Deux patientes présentaient une collection profonde nécessitant un drainage chirurgical associé à une antibiothérapie. Cinq patientes ont été traitées par antibiothérapie seule. Dans deux cas, le germe retrouvé était un streptocoque A et dans un cas, Staphylococcus aureus. Une patiente a nécessité une hospitalisation en unité de soins intensifs. Seules les patientes ayant nécessité un traitement chirurgical ont présenté des séquelles esthétiques modérées.