Adenomatoid tumors of ovary mimicking malignancy: report of 2 cases and literature review.
Adenoatoid tumor
BAP1
CDKN2A/p16
L1CAM
Laparoscopic surgery
Ovary
Journal
BMC women's health
ISSN: 1472-6874
Titre abrégé: BMC Womens Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088690
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 12 2022
26 12 2022
Historique:
received:
05
08
2022
accepted:
19
12
2022
entrez:
26
12
2022
pubmed:
27
12
2022
medline:
29
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Adenomatoid tumors (ATs) are benign tumors originating from the mesothelium. ATs of the ovary are rare, and can easily be confused with malignancy due to the histomorphological diversity. Thus, it is difficult in histopathological and differential diagnosis, especially during intraoperative frozen pathological diagnosis, which directly affects the resection scope of surgery. In this study, we reported two patients (58 and 41 year old) with ovarian ATs. AT of patient 1 occurred in both ovaries at different time points and she had been diagnosed with Hashimoto's thyroiditis. AT of patient 2 occurred in right ovary. Intraoperative frozen pathological diagnosis was performed in both cases and laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy was undergone on the lesion side according to benign freezing diagnostic result. Ovarian ATs, the final diagnoses of the 2 cases were concluded after histological, extensive immunohistochemical (IHC), histochemical, and fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses. Our results show that ovarian ATs may not be related to BAP1 or CDKN2A/p16 mutations. In addition, the case 1 suggests that ATs may be associated with immune dysregulation. When encountering such similar lessions, we recommend that a series of immunohistochemical, histochemical and molecular biological techniques should be used for diagnosis and differential diagnosis to avoid misdiagnosis. Improving understanding of the rare ovarian ATs which mimic malignancy is necessary to prevent overresection.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Adenomatoid tumors (ATs) are benign tumors originating from the mesothelium. ATs of the ovary are rare, and can easily be confused with malignancy due to the histomorphological diversity. Thus, it is difficult in histopathological and differential diagnosis, especially during intraoperative frozen pathological diagnosis, which directly affects the resection scope of surgery.
CASE PRESENTATION
In this study, we reported two patients (58 and 41 year old) with ovarian ATs. AT of patient 1 occurred in both ovaries at different time points and she had been diagnosed with Hashimoto's thyroiditis. AT of patient 2 occurred in right ovary. Intraoperative frozen pathological diagnosis was performed in both cases and laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy was undergone on the lesion side according to benign freezing diagnostic result. Ovarian ATs, the final diagnoses of the 2 cases were concluded after histological, extensive immunohistochemical (IHC), histochemical, and fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results show that ovarian ATs may not be related to BAP1 or CDKN2A/p16 mutations. In addition, the case 1 suggests that ATs may be associated with immune dysregulation. When encountering such similar lessions, we recommend that a series of immunohistochemical, histochemical and molecular biological techniques should be used for diagnosis and differential diagnosis to avoid misdiagnosis. Improving understanding of the rare ovarian ATs which mimic malignancy is necessary to prevent overresection.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36572896
doi: 10.1186/s12905-022-02138-6
pii: 10.1186/s12905-022-02138-6
pmc: PMC9791720
doi:
Types de publication
Review
Case Reports
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
547Subventions
Organisme : Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province
ID : 2020-ZLLH-45
Organisme : Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province
ID : 2019-KF-01-02
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2003 Aug;29(4):234-8
pubmed: 12959144
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2007 Jan;26(1):16-20
pubmed: 17197891
Am J Pathol. 1945 Jan;21(1):63-79
pubmed: 19970804
Ann Diagn Pathol. 2020 Aug;47:151553
pubmed: 32580034
Case Rep Obstet Gynecol. 2017;2017:3702682
pubmed: 29085685
Neuro Oncol. 2016 Jul;18(7):919-27
pubmed: 26984744
Mod Pathol. 2018 Apr;31(4):660-673
pubmed: 29148537
Cancer. 1958 Mar-Apr;11(2):337-50
pubmed: 13511355
Mod Pathol. 2017 Feb;30(2):246-254
pubmed: 27813512
Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2016 May 11;17:96-8
pubmed: 27556063
Hum Pathol. 2018 Sep;79:168-176
pubmed: 29763720
Mod Pathol. 2019 Jan;32(1):88-99
pubmed: 30171198
Mod Pathol. 2015 Oct;28(10):1360-8
pubmed: 26226841
Am J Surg Pathol. 2018 Feb;42(2):256-263
pubmed: 29076876
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1991;10(4):364-71
pubmed: 1774107
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2003 Apr;22(2):198-201
pubmed: 12649678
Virchows Arch. 2011 May;458(5):593-602
pubmed: 21337036
J Clin Ultrasound. 2005 Jun;33(5):233-6
pubmed: 16047378
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2000 Oct;92(2):205-7
pubmed: 10996682
Diagn Cytopathol. 2018 Jan;46(1):9-14
pubmed: 28994508
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 1988 Jun;18(2):159-66
pubmed: 2454335
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1992 Oct;11(4):288-92
pubmed: 1399234
Mod Pathol. 2015 Aug;28(8):1043-57
pubmed: 26022455
Nature. 2014 Feb 27;506(7489):451-5
pubmed: 24553141
Am J Pathol. 1943 May;19(3):461-71
pubmed: 19970703
Biores Open Access. 2018 Oct 26;7(1):159-164
pubmed: 30393587
Mod Pathol. 2009 Sep;22(9):1228-35
pubmed: 19543245
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009 Feb;19(2):242-4
pubmed: 19396001
J Thorac Oncol. 2017 Apr;12(4):724-733
pubmed: 28034829
Mayo Clin Proc. 2003 Mar;78(3):350-4
pubmed: 12630589
Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2002 Jan;21(1):34-40
pubmed: 11781521