Case Report
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Hepatol. Jan 27, 2025; 17(1): 101664
Published online Jan 27, 2025. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v17.i1.101664
Table 1 Laboratory test findings upon admission
Parameter
Result
Blood test
White blood cells9.71 K/µL
Eosinophils35.3%
Neutrophils39.1%
Hemoglobin120 g/L
Hematocrit37.4%
Aspartate aminotransferase27.2 U/L
Alanine aminotransferase30.4 U/L
Total bilirubin 6.0 μmol/L
Direct bilirubin 2.28 μmol/L
Carcinoembryonic antigen< 0.5 ng/mL
Carbohydrate antigen 19-9< 2.0 ng/mL
Diagnostic serum test
Hepatitis B surface antigenNegative (0.27)
Quantitative hepatitis B surface antibody91.48 mIU/mL
Hepatitis C virus antibodyNegative (0.11)
Fasciola sp. IgGPositive (0.976)
Entamoeba histolytica IgGNegative (0.08)
Toxocara IgGNegative (0.17)
Strongyloides stercoralis IgGGrayzone (0.26)
Table 2 Clinical timeline for hepatic eosinophilic pseudotumor misdiagnosed as intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Timeframe
Event
1 month prior admissionPatient presented with recurring upper abdominal pain, fever with chills, and significant weight loss
Week 1Patient underwent a clinical evaluation and basic laboratory tests, including complete blood count and tumor markers
Week 2Abdominal CT and magnetic resonance imaging scans revealed a mass in the hepatic hilum, raising suspicion of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Week 3Liver biopsies, performed twice, showed no malignant cells but revealed significant eosinophilic infiltration
Week 4Serologic testing was positive for Fasciola hepatica; treatment with triclabendazole was initiated
6 months laterThe patient exhibited marked symptom improvement, weight gain, and complete resolution of the hepatic mass on imaging studies. Furthermore, serologic testing for Fasciola sp. IgG yielded negative results, and stool examinations for parasitic identification were also negative