Journals / Eastern Journal of Medicine / 2018 / Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 2

The comparative evaluation of uterine sarcoma: preoperatively unexpected or diagnosed? Does it matter?

Pages
110–114
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This finding may result from "myomectomy procedure" itself.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:We aim to identify clinical characteristics, outcome and prognosis of uterine sarcoma cases and compare clinical outcome of preoperatively or postoperatively (unexpected) diagnosed patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this retrospective study, medical records of patients with uterine sarcoma were evaluated at the Zeynep Kamil Women and Children Education and Research Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, from January 2009 to December 2016.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This finding may result from "myomectomy procedure" itself.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

We aim to identify clinical characteristics, outcome and prognosis of uterine sarcoma cases and compare clinical outcome of preoperatively or postoperatively (unexpected) diagnosed patients. In this retrospective study, medical records of patients with uterine sarcoma were evaluated at the Zeynep Kamil Women and Children Education and Research Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, from January 2009 to December 2016. The age at diagnosis, gravidity, parity, menopausal status, complaints, comorbidity, tumor grade, tumor histology, stage of disease, postoperative adjuvant therapy, recurrence rate, location of recurrence, follow-up interval, and survival rate were analysed. Additionally, patients were divided into two groups: patients with diagnosed preoperatively and diagnosed postoperatively (unexpected). Two groups were compared regarding clinical characteristics. Sixty-three patients were found to have uterine sarcoma. Mean age of patients was 51.8±11.7. Twenty-nine (46%) patients had leiomyosarcoma, 11 (17.5%) patients had endometrial stromal sarcoma and 13 (20.6%) had malign mixt mullerian tumor. Of 63 patients, 49 had pre-operative uterine sarcoma diagnosis and 14 patients had unexpected uterine sarcoma. The incidence of unexpected sarcoma was detected as 0.3%. The recurrence rate was significantly higher in patients with unexpected uterine sarcoma compared with patients had pre-operative uterine sarcoma diagnosis (42.8% vs 14.2%, respectively, p=0.002). All patients with recurrent disease in unexpected sarcoma group had local recurrence (100%). Regarding survival rates, there was no statistically difference between two groups (65.3% vs 57.1%). Uterine sarcoma is a rare tumor entity. Unexpected sarcoma cases found to have high recurrence rate and had totally local metastases. This finding may result from "myomectomy procedure" itself.

🔖

Cite This Article

KILIÇÇI, Ç. (2018). The comparative evaluation of uterine sarcoma: preoperatively unexpected or diagnosed? Does it matter?. Eastern Journal of Medicine, Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 2, 110–114. https://ajindex.com/articles/197954

References (15)

  1. Sivakumari S, Rajaraman R, Subbiah S. Uterine sarcoma: The Indian Scenario. Indian J Surg Oncol 2015; 6: 232-236
  2. Potikul C, Tangjitgamol S, Khunnarong J, et al. Uterine sarcoma: Clinical presentation, treatment and survival outcomes in Thailand. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2016; 17: 1759-1767
  3. Hosh M, Antar S, Nazal A, et al. Uterine sarcoma: Analysis 13.089 cases based on surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Int J Gyn Cancer 2016; 26: 1098-104
  4. George S, Barysauskas C, Serrano C, et al. REtrospective cohort study evaluating the impact of intraperitoneal morcellation on outcomes of localized uterine leiomyosarcoma. Cancer 2014; 120: 3154-3158
  5. Park JY, Park SK, Kim DY, et al. The impact of tumor morcellation during surgery on the prognosis of patients with apperently early uterine leiomyosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 2011; 122: 255- 259
  6. Perri T, Korach J, Sadetzki S, et al. Uterine leiomyosarcoma: Does the primary surgical procedure matter? Int J Gyn Cancer 2009; 19: 257-260
  7. Morice P, Rodrigez A, Rey A, et al. Prognostic value of initial surgical procedure for patients with uterine sarcoma: Analysis of 123 patients. Eur J Gynecol Oncol 2003; 24: 237-240
  8. Seidman MA, Oduyebo T, Muto MG, et al. Peritoneal dissemination complicating morcellation of uterine mesenchymal neoplasms. PLoS One 2012; 7:e50058
  9. Benito V, Lubrano A, Arencibia O, et al. Clinopathologic analysis of uterine sarcomas from a single institution in the Canary Islands. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009; 1079: 44-49
  10. Durnali A, Tokoglu S, Ozdemir N, et al. Prognostic factors and treatment outcomes in 93 patients with uterine sarcoma from 4 centers in Turkey. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2012; 13: 1935- 1941
  11. Bostanci E, Ayas S,Gurbuz TA, et al. Retrospective analysis of 29 cases with uterine sarcoma: A single center experience. Dicle Medical Journal 2015; 42: 175-180
  12. Parker WH, Fu YS, Berek JS. Uterine sarcoma in patients operated on for presumed leiomyoma and rapidly growing leiomyoma. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 83: 414-418
  13. Sinha R, Hegde A, Mahajan C. et al. Laparoscopic myomectomy: do size, number, and location of the myomas from limiting factors for laparoscopic myomectomy? J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2008; 15: 292-300
  14. Gustafson P, Dreinhofer KE, Rydholm A. Soft tissue carcinoma should be treated at a tumor center. A comparison of quality of surgery in 375 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 1994; 65: 47-50
  15. US Food and Drug Administration. Quantitative As