nach oben

International Journal of Clinical Oncology

Erschienen in:

16.01.2020 | Original Article

Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes of retroperitoneal tumors: a comprehensive data collection from multiple departments

verfasst von: Naoto Sassa, Yukihiro Yokoyama, Yoshihiro Nishida, Suguru Yamada, Hiroo Uchida, Hiroaki Kajiyama, Masato Nagino, Yasuhiro Kodera, Momokazu Gotoh

Erschienen in: International Journal of Clinical Oncology | Ausgabe 5/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

There are only a limited number of comprehensive reports for retroperitoneal tumors (RPTs). The aim of this study was to perform an interdepartmental data collection for RPTs and to comprehensively clarify the clinical characteristics of this rare disease.

Methods

All patients who were diagnosed with RPT from January 2005 to July 2018 in a single institution were included. The analyzed factors included demographics, clinical features, treatment methods, pathological diagnosis, and prognosis.

Results

A total of 422 patients (215 males and 207 females) with primary RPTs were identified. Biopsy for RPT was performed in 180 patients (43%). Among the 422 patients, 239 (57%) underwent surgery. The most common tissue origin was mesodermal (n = 99, 41%), followed by neurogenic (n = 54, 23%), extragonadal (n = 27, 11%), and metastatic tumors (n = 13, 5%). Among the 99 resected mesodermal tumors, the most common pathological subtypes were liposarcoma (n = 55, 56%) and leiomyosarcoma (n = 16, 16%). The long-term outcomes after surgery were analyzed in patients with intermediate and malignant sarcomas (including liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, and others combined, n = 71). The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates in the intermediate tumors were 68.2% and 54.2%, respectively, whereas those in the malignant tumors were 48.6% and 28.9%, respectively. The 3- and 5-year overall survival rates in the intermediate tumors were 100% and 94.1%, respectively, whereas those in the malignant tumors were 78.4% and 72.8%, respectively (p = 0.009).

Conclusions

The clinical manifestations of RPTs were extremely variable. Recurrence after repeating resection is commonly observed in patients with malignant retroperitoneal sarcoma.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Osman S, Lehnert BE, Elojeimy S et al (2013) A comprehensive review of the retroperitoneal anatomy, neoplasms, and pattern of disease spread. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 42(5):191–208PubMedCrossRef

Scali EP, Chandler TM, Heffernan EJ et al (2015) Primary retroperitoneal masses: what is the differential diagnosis? Abdom Imaging 40(6):1887–1903PubMedCrossRef

Ikoma N, Roland CL, Torres KE et al (2018) Concomitant organ resection does not improve outcomes in primary retroperitoneal well-differentiated liposarcoma: a retrospective cohort study at a major sarcoma center. J Surg Oncol 117(6):1188–1194PubMedCrossRef

Gronchi A, Miceli R, Allard MA et al (2015) Personalizing the approach to retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma: histology-specific patterns of failure and postrelapse outcome after primary extended resection. Ann Surg Oncol 22(5):1447–1454PubMedCrossRef

Macneill AJ, Miceli R, Strauss DC et al (2017) Post-relapse outcomes after primary extended resection of retroperitoneal sarcoma: a report from the Trans-Atlantic RPS Working Group. Cancer 123(11):1971–1978PubMedCrossRef

Keung EZ, Chiang YJ, Cormier JN et al (2018) Treatment at low-volume hospitals is associated with reduced short-term and long-term outcomes for patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma. Cancer 124(23):4495–4503PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Nazzani S, Preisser F, Bandini M et al (2018) Surgically treated retroperitoneal sarcoma: a population-based competing risks analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 1(4):346–351PubMedCrossRef

Liang SX, Howitt B, Blitz MJ et al (2015) Primary myxoid liposarcoma of the ovary in a postpartum female: a case report and review of literature. Int J Gynecol Pathol 34(3):298–302PubMedCrossRef

Li M, Li H, Du Y et al (2017) Combined anterior-posterior approach with enlarged sciatic foramen to remove sciatic notch dumbbell-shaped tumors. J Surg Oncol 115(4):384–389PubMedCrossRef

10.

Gronchi A, Strauss DC, Miceli R et al (2016) Variability in patterns of recurrence after resection of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS): a report on 1007 patients from the multi-institutional collaborative RPS Working Group. Ann Surg 263(5):1002–1009PubMedCrossRef

11.

Fletcher C, Bridge J, Hogendoorn P et al (2013) WHO classification of tumours of soft tisue and bone, 4th edn.

12.

Goenka AH, Shah SN, Remer EM (2012) Imaging of the retroperitoneum. Radiol Clin North Am 50(2):333–355 (vii) PubMedCrossRef

13.

Trans-Atlantic RPSWG (2015) Management of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) in the adult: a consensus approach from the Trans-Atlantic RPS Working Group. Ann Surg Oncol 22(1):256–263CrossRef

14.

Nishino M, Hayakawa K, Minami M et al (2003) Primary retroperitoneal neoplasms: CT and MR imaging findings with anatomic and pathologic diagnostic clues. Radiographics 23(1):45–57PubMedCrossRef

15.

Almond LM, Tirotta F, Tattersall H et al (2019) Diagnostic accuracy of percutaneous biopsy in retroperitoneal sarcoma. Br J Surg 106(4):395–403PubMedCrossRef

16.

Berger-Richardson D, Swallow CJ (2017) Needle tract seeding after percutaneous biopsy of sarcoma: risk/benefit considerations. Cancer 123(4):560–567PubMedCrossRef

17.

Van Houdt WJ, Schrijver AM, Cohen-Hallaleh RB et al (2017) Needle tract seeding following core biopsies in retroperitoneal sarcoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 43(9):1740–1745PubMedCrossRef

18.

Wilkinson MJ, Martin JL, Khan AA et al (2015) Percutaneous core needle biopsy in retroperitoneal sarcomas does not influence local recurrence or overall survival. Ann Surg Oncol 22(3):853–858PubMedCrossRef

19.

Gronchi A, Miceli R, Shurell E et al (2013) Outcome prediction in primary resected retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma: histology-specific overall survival and disease-free survival nomograms built on major sarcoma center data sets. J Clin Oncol 31(13):1649–1655PubMedCrossRef

20.

Toulmonde M, Bonvalot S, Ray-Coquard I et al (2014) Retroperitoneal sarcomas: patterns of care in advanced stages, prognostic factors and focus on main histological subtypes: a multicenter analysis of the French Sarcoma Group. Ann Oncol 25(3):730–734PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

21.

Casali PG, Abecassis N, Aro HT et al (2018) Soft tissue and visceral sarcomas: ESMO-EURACAN Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 29((Supplement_4)):iv268–iv269PubMedCrossRef

22.

Toulmonde M, Bonvalot S, Meeus P et al (2014) Retroperitoneal sarcomas: patterns of care at diagnosis, prognostic factors and focus on main histological subtypes: a multicenter analysis of the French Sarcoma Group. Ann Oncol 25(3):735–742PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

23.

Wilkinson KH, Ethun CG, Hembrook M et al (2019) Outcomes of elderly patients undergoing curative resection for retroperitoneal sarcomas: analysis from the US Sarcoma Collaborative. J Surg Res 233:154–162PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes of retroperitoneal tumors: a comprehensive data collection from multiple departments
verfasst von: Naoto Sassa
Yukihiro Yokoyama
Yoshihiro Nishida
Suguru Yamada
Hiroo Uchida
Hiroaki Kajiyama
Masato Nagino
Yasuhiro Kodera
Momokazu Gotoh
Publikationsdatum: 16.01.2020
Verlag: Springer Singapore
Erschienen in: International Journal of Clinical Oncology / Ausgabe 5/2020
Print ISSN: 1341-9625
Elektronische ISSN: 1437-7772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-020-01620-1

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Umsetzung der POMGAT-Leitlinie läuft

03.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.

Springer Medizin

Clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes of retroperitoneal tumors: a comprehensive data collection from multiple departments