Sung Bin Park1, Min-Jeong Kim2, Kyoung Ho Lee3,4, Yousun Ko3. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine , Seoul , Korea. 2. 2 Department of Radiology, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital , Gyeonggi-do , Korea. 3. 3 Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital , Gyeonggi-do , Korea. 4. 4 Program in Biomedical Radiation Sciences, Department of Transdisciplinary Studies, Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University , Seoul , Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate the clinical, pathological, and imaging features of ovarian serous surface papillary borderline tumors (SSPBTs). METHODS: Imaging features were analyzed, including the tumor size, laterality, tumor spread and the presence of ascites. Morphological nature (encased normal ovary, characteristics on MRI) and contrast enhancement (increased flow on Doppler ultrasound) were also evaluated. Clinical and pathological features, such as tumor markers (CA 125), treatment methods, outcomes on follow-up, and surgical staging, were analyzed. RESULTS: 10 tumors in 5 patients were evaluated. Mean largest tumor diameter was 45 mm. All patients had bilateral involvement and ascites. 40% of all patients showed peritoneal implants. 20% of patients evaluated had lymph node metastasis. These patients showed grossly normal ovaries that were encased in or surrounded by irregular solid tumors. They had a mostly hyperintense papillary architecture with hypointense internal branching on T2 weighted MR images (90%). Contrast enhancement and serum levels of CA 125 were elevated in all cases evaluated. All patients underwent radical surgery, and 80% of patients evaluated were of low stage. No recurrence occurred, during follow-up. CONCLUSION: SSPBT of the ovary, which has a good prognosis, should be considered as a diagnosis for patients who have bilateral enhancing irregular solid masses with papillary architecture and internal branching, and encasing normal-appearing ovaries. Advances in knowledge: Serous surface papillary borderline tumor of the ovary is unique and has characteristic features. Knowledge of this specific ovarian tumor and radiological suspicion can have important implications for the patient to facilitate management including fertility-preserving surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively evaluate the clinical, pathological, and imaging features of ovarian serous surface papillary borderline tumors (SSPBTs). METHODS: Imaging features were analyzed, including the tumor size, laterality, tumor spread and the presence of ascites. Morphological nature (encased normal ovary, characteristics on MRI) and contrast enhancement (increased flow on Doppler ultrasound) were also evaluated. Clinical and pathological features, such as tumor markers (CA 125), treatment methods, outcomes on follow-up, and surgical staging, were analyzed. RESULTS: 10 tumors in 5 patients were evaluated. Mean largest tumor diameter was 45 mm. All patients had bilateral involvement and ascites. 40% of all patients showed peritoneal implants. 20% of patients evaluated had lymph node metastasis. These patients showed grossly normal ovaries that were encased in or surrounded by irregular solid tumors. They had a mostly hyperintense papillary architecture with hypointense internal branching on T2 weighted MR images (90%). Contrast enhancement and serum levels of CA 125 were elevated in all cases evaluated. All patients underwent radical surgery, and 80% of patients evaluated were of low stage. No recurrence occurred, during follow-up. CONCLUSION: SSPBT of the ovary, which has a good prognosis, should be considered as a diagnosis for patients who have bilateral enhancing irregular solid masses with papillary architecture and internal branching, and encasing normal-appearing ovaries. Advances in knowledge: Serous surface papillary borderline tumor of the ovary is unique and has characteristic features. Knowledge of this specific ovarian tumor and radiological suspicion can have important implications for the patient to facilitate management including fertility-preserving surgery.
Authors: F Trillsch; S Mahner; Jd Ruetzel; P Harter; N Ewald-Riegler; F Jaenicke; A du Bois Journal: Expert Rev Anticancer Ther Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 4.512
Authors: K K Shih; Q Zhou; J Huh; J C Morgan; A Iasonos; C Aghajanian; D S Chi; R R Barakat; N R Abu-Rustum Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2010-12-10 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Luigi Della Corte; Antonio Mercorio; Paolo Serafino; Francesco Viciglione; Mario Palumbo; Maria Chiara De Angelis; Maria Borgo; Cira Buonfantino; Marina Tesorone; Giuseppe Bifulco; Pierluigi Giampaolino Journal: Front Surg Date: 2022-08-23