» Articles » PMID: 26537303

Ultrasonographic Findings of Low-grade Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma of the Uterus with a Focus on Cystic Degeneration

Overview
Journal Ultrasonography
Date 2015 Nov 6
PMID 26537303
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The goal of this study was to perform a retrospective analysis of the ultrasonographic findings associated with low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma.

Methods: Ten pathologically confirmed cases of low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma at our institution from January 2007 to April 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent a preoperative transvaginal ultrasound. Two radiologists came to a consensus regarding the location, size, margin, and echogenicity of the tumor, as well as the presence of intratumoral cystic degeneration and its extent and configuration.

Results: Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma manifested as an intramural mass protruding into the endometrial cavity (n=6) or as a purely intramural mass (n=4). The maximal diameter of the lesion ranged from 4 to 9.1 cm (mean, 6.2 cm). The imaging features of low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma were variable: six cases involved predominantly solid masses containing cystic degeneration, one was a predominantly unilocular cystic mass, two were ill-defined infiltrative solid masses, and one was a well-defined solid mass. Among the seven cases with internal cystic degeneration, five patients showed a multiseptated cystic area or a cystic area with multiple small clusters, while a unilocular cystic area within the tumor was found in two patients.

Conclusion: Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma is associated with variable ultrasonographic findings with regard to the location, margin, and configuration of the lesion. Multiseptated cystic areas and multiple small areas of cystic degeneration are common.

Citing Articles

A Rare Case of Low-Grade Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma Invading an Old Leiomyoma.

Inoue K, Kuroshima M, Murata Y, Morita H Cureus. 2024; 16(11):e73329.

PMID: 39655119 PMC: 11626990. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.73329.


Trabectedin and Radiotherapy in Endometrial Stromal Sarcoma: A Case Report.

Carrasco Garcia I, Benedetti Pedroza J, Miras Rodriguez I, Rincon I Case Rep Oncol. 2024; 17(1):82-90.

PMID: 38213958 PMC: 10783890. DOI: 10.1159/000535747.


Sonographic and Magnetic Resonance Characteristics of Gynecological Sarcoma.

Camponovo C, Neumann S, Zosso L, Mueller M, Raio L Diagnostics (Basel). 2023; 13(7).

PMID: 37046441 PMC: 10092971. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13071223.


Case report: High-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma with adrenal glands metastases: An unreported site of metastasis.

Zhang T, Feng R, Yin S, Feng W, Yin Z, Wang H Front Oncol. 2022; 12:1058700.

PMID: 36505854 PMC: 9726922. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1058700.


CT, MRI, and FDG-PET imaging findings of low-grade extrauterine endometrial stromal sarcoma arising from the mesentery: A case report.

Suzuki S, Kurokawa R, Tsuruga T, Mori-Uchino M, Nishida H, Kato T Radiol Case Rep. 2021; 16(9):2774-2779.

PMID: 34367393 PMC: 8326572. DOI: 10.1016/j.radcr.2021.06.063.

References
1.
Doghri R, Mrad K, Driss M, Sassi S, Abbes I, Dhouib R . Endometrial stromal sarcoma presenting as a cystic abdominal mass. Pathologica. 2009; 101(2):93-6. View

2.
Gadducci A, Cosio S, Romanini A, Genazzani A . The management of patients with uterine sarcoma: a debated clinical challenge. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2007; 65(2):129-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2007.06.011. View

3.
Somma A, Falleti J, Di Simone D, Marra A, Nazzaro G, Miranda M . Cystic variant of endometrial stromal sarcoma: report of two cases. Int J Surg Pathol. 2012; 21(3):278-81. DOI: 10.1177/1066896912461528. View

4.
Eun Rha S, Byun J, Jung S, Lee S, Cho S, Hwang S . CT and MRI of uterine sarcomas and their mimickers. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003; 181(5):1369-74. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.181.5.1811369. View

5.
Cho F, Liu C, Yu K . Low-grade endometrial stromal sarcoma initially manifesting as a large complex pedunculated mass arising from the uterine surface. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 38(2):233-4. DOI: 10.1002/uog.8975. View