Cárdenas-Serrano ÓE, Villalón-López JS, Ruiz-Mar G, Daza-Benítez L

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 515-521
PDF size: 428.03 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: Uterine sarcomas are rare but extremely aggressive malignant uterine pathology; mostly incidentally diagnosed at an advanced stage, with a higher aggressiveness and poor prognosis.
Objective: To determine the epidemiological profile of women with this diagnosis in Ginecopediatria Hospital, UMAE 48 of IMSS and its correlation with the literature.
Material and methods: A retrospective and observational study was done from 2007 to 2014 in UMAE 48, IMSS León, Guanajuato, in which the clinical records of patients with such diagnoses were reviewed.
Results: A total of 11 cases with age range 21-66 years had abnormal bleeding (82%), abdominal pain (64%), enlarged uterus (64%) and isolated elevation of lactic dehydrogenase (55%). The leiomyosarcoma accounted for 55%, sarcoma mixed Mullerian (SMM) 27% and endometrial stromal sarcoma (SEE) in 22% of cases. The stage I was the most frequent (55%) and histological type, which presented a more advanced stage was the SMM (stage IIIC). The hysterectomy with pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy was the most common treatment (67%). The 45% of patients had tumor activity subsequent to treatment and the use of radiotherapy and chemotherapy was not associated with activity.
Conclusion: Clinical features, risk factors and distribution of the presentation of the various sarcomas were according with previous studies, requiring further research to improve prognosis and survival in this type of tumor.

REFERENCES

1. Martínez-Madrigal M, Muñoz-González D, Ochoa-Carrillo F, Camacho-Beiza I y col. Sarcoma uterino: Revisión de la literatura. GAMO 2012;11: 112-116.

2. Naaman Y, Shveiky D, Ben-Schachar I, Shushan A, et al. Uterine Sarcoma: Prognostic Factors and Treatment Evaluation. IMAJ 2011;13:76-79.

3. Pautier P, Genestie C, Rey A, Morice P, et al. Analysis of clinicopathologic prognostic factors for 157 uterine sarcomas and evaluation of a grading score validated for soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer 2000;88:1425-1431

4. Zivanovic O, Leitao MM, Lasonos A, Jacks L, et al. Stage-specific outcomes of patients with uterine leiomyosarcoma: a comparison of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics and American Joint Committee on Cancer staging systems. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:2066-2072.

5. Zagouri F, Dimopoulos AM, Fotiou S, Kouloulias V, et al. Treatment of early uterine sarcomas: disentangling adjuvant modalities. World J Surg Oncol 2009;7:38

6. Mortara A, González R, Arias R, A Sangines A y col. Sarcoma uterino. Reporte de caso. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2012;80:224-227

7. Harry V, Narayansingh G, Parkin D. Uterine leiomyosarcomas: a review of the diagnostic and therapeutic pitfalls. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;9:88-94.

8. Barney B, Petersen I, Dowdy S, Bakkun-Gamez J, et al. Long-Term Outcomes With Intraoperative Radiotherapy as a Component of Treatment for Locally Advanced or Recurrent Uterine Sarcoma. Int J Radiation Oncol Biol Phys 2012;83:191-197

9. Benoit L, Arnould L, Cheynel N, Goui S, et al. The role of surgery and treatment trends in uterine sarcoma. Euro J Surg Oncol 2005;31:434-42.

10. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Uterine Neoplasms.V.1.2014. Acccessed at www.nccn.org Abril 20, 2015

11. Wu T, Chang T, Hsueh S, Hsu KH, et al. Prognostic factors and impact of adjuvant chemotherapy for uterine leiomyosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 2006;100:166-72.

12. Benito v, Lubrano A, Arencibia O, Andujar M, et al. Clinicopathologic analysis of uterine sarcomas from a single institution in the Canary Islands, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2009;107:44-49.