| Literature DB >> 34118148 |
Kaori Takamura1, Hiroshi Kobayashi2, Brian P Rubin3, Shuhei Kondo1, Fuyuki Asami4, Ryuji Aoyagi5, Yoichi Ajioka1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Primary aortic sarcoma often poses diagnostic challenges for pathologists and clinicians because of a very low incidence and controversy over nomenclature and definition. We report a case of aortic angiosarcoma in association with a graft. We also conducted a clinicopathological review of cases of primary aortic sarcomas associated with implanted grafts. CASE REPORT The patient was an 82-year-old woman. She underwent thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) at age 78 because of an aneurysm in the descending aorta. Approximately 4 years after the TEVAR, computed tomography revealed a type II endoleak and expansion of the aneurysm. Her c-reactive protein level rose to 34 mg/dL, and Ga scintigraphy showed 67Ga accumulation at the aneurysm. She had fever up to 39°C, and a stent graft infection was suspected. Despite administration of antibiotics, her condition deteriorated, and she died. Postmortem examination identified epithelioid aortic angiosarcoma at the aorta with aneurysm repair and the graft, and the aortic angiosarcoma invaded the left lower lobe of the lung. CONCLUSIONS Our clinicopathological review revealed that the proper clinical diagnosis was very difficult owing to confusion of aortic sarcoma after the implantation with the infected graft, atypical endoleak, or pseudoaneurysm. The histological diagnosis was ambiguous because immunohistochemical and genetic studies were not adequately conducted. Overall prognosis of aortic sarcoma is poor as most patients die within a year, with no effective treatments. It is hoped that recent projects for genomic medicine will provide useful insights about the diagnosis and treatment of these cancers.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34118148 PMCID: PMC8212843 DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.931740
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Case Rep ISSN: 1941-5923
Clinical features of reported cases with aortic sarcoma associated with aortic prostheses.
| O’Connell TX, 1976 | 7 | M | 59 | AR | Dacron | AA | 4 ms |
| Weinberg DS, 1980 | 8 | M | 48 | AR | Dacron | TA | 14 ms |
| Fehrenbacher JW, 1981 | 9 | M | 67 | AR | Dacron | AA | 12 ys |
| Peterson HS, 1989 | 10 | M | 57 | AR | Dacron | TA | 6 ms |
| Weiss WM, 1991 | 11 | M | 56 | AR | Dacron | AA | 3 ys 6 ms |
| Fyfe BS, 1994 | 12 | M | 70 | AR | Dacron | TA | 4 ys |
| Ben-Izhak O, 1999 | 13 | M | 71 | AR | Dacron | AA | 8 ys |
| Okada M, 2004 | 14 | M | 50 | AR | Dacron | TA | 17 ys |
| Umscheid TW, 2007 | 15 | M | 50 | EVAR | Dacron | AA | 4 ys 8 ms |
| Alexander JJ, 2007 | 16 | M | 66 | AR | Dacron | AA | 16 ms |
| Garg N, 2012 | 17 | M | 56 | EVAR | Dacron | AA | 6 ys |
| Schmehl J, 2012 | 18 | M | 85 | EVAR | Dacron | AA | 7 ys |
| Stewart B, 2013 | 19 | M | 86 | EVAR | Dacron | AA | 9 ys |
| Fenton J, 2014 | 20 | M | 72 | EVAR | Dacron | AA | 6 ys |
| Kimura S, 2015 | 21 | M | 78 | AR | Dacron | TA | 16 ys |
| Milite D, 2016 | 22 | M | 60 | EVAR | PTFE | AA | 7 ys |
| Kamran M, 2016 | 23 | M | 69 | EVAR | N.D. | AA | 8 ys |
| Kamran M, 2016 | 23 | M | 77 | EVAR | N.D. | AA | N.D. |
| Kamran M, 2016 | 23 | F | 72 | EVAR | N.D. | AA | 6 ms |
| Whittington EA, 2019 | 24 | M | 78 | EVAR | ePTFE | AA | 10 ys |
| Yu PC, 2019 | 25 | M | 68 | EVAR | ePTFE | AA | 4 ys |
| Natsume K, 2019 | 26 | M | 54 | EVAR | Dacron | TA | 17 ys |
| Current case | F | 82 | EVAR | ePTFE | TA | 4 ys |
In site of aneurysm, descending aorta in thracic aorta and infrarenal aorta in abdominal aorta was most.
Time to the tumor detection after surgery;
newly developed aneurysm;
mass indicating a possible neoplasm. AR – aortic replacement with prosthetic graft; EVAR – endovascular aortic repair; N.D. – not described; ePTFE – expanded polytetrafluoroethylene; AA – abdominal aorta; TA – thoracic aorta; C – chemotherapy; R – radiation therapy; ms – months; ys – years.
Clinicopathologic features of reported aortic angiosarcomas associated with aortic prostheses.
| O’Connell TX, 1976 | 7 | M | 59 | AR | AA | 7 cm |
| Weinberg DS, 1980 | 8 | M | 48 | AR | TA | 7.4×1.5×2 cm |
| Fehrenbacher JW, 1981 | 9 | M | 67 | AR | AA | 6×2.4 cm |
| Peterson HS, 1989 | 10 | M | 57 | AR | TA | N.D. (a large mass) |
| Weiss WM, 1991 | 11 | M | 56 | AR | AA | 6×4×3.5 cm |
| Fyfe BS, 1994 | 12 | M | 70 | AR | TA | N.D. |
| Ben-Izhak O, 1999 | 13 | M | 71 | AR | AA | 5.5×4.5 cm |
| Okada M, 2004 | 14 | M | 50 | AR | TA | N.D. |
| Umscheid TW, 2007 | 15 | M | 50 | EVAR | AA | N.D. |
| Alexander JJ, 2007 | 16 | M | 66 | AR | AA | 1.6×0.8 cm |
| Garg N, 2012 | 17 | M | 56 | EVAR | AA | N.D. |
| Schmehl J, 2012 | 18 | M | 85 | EVAR | AA | N.D. |
| Stewart B, 2013 | 19 | M | 86 | EVAR | AA | N.D. |
| Fenton J, 2014 | 20 | M | 72 | EVAR | AA | N.D. |
| Kimura S, 2015 | 21 | M | 78 | AR | TA | 4.5×3 cm |
| Milite D, 2016 | 22 | M | 60 | EVAR | AA | 10.2 cm |
| Kamran M, 2016 | 23 | M | 69 | EVAR | AA | 3.1×2.4 cm |
| Kamran M, 2016 | 23 | M | 77 | EVAR | AA | N.D. |
| Kamran M, 2016 | 23 | F | 72 | EVAR | AA | 7.3 cm |
| Whittington EA, 2019 | 24 | M | 78 | EVAR | AA | 8.4 cm |
| Yu PC, 2019 | 25 | M | 68 | EVAR | AA | 4.2 cm |
| Natsume K, 2019 | 26 | M | 54 | AR | TA | 4.0×2.2×2 cm |
| Current case | F | 82 | EVAR | TA | 10×6.5×2 cm |
AR – aortic replacement with prosthetic graft; EVAR – endovascular aortic repair; AA – abdominal aorta; TA – thoracic aorta; N.D. – not described; FS – fibrosarcoma; MFH – malignant fibrous histiocytoma; AS – angiosarcoma; pMFH – pleomorphic malignant fibrous histiocytoma; eAS – epithelioid angiosarcoma; eLS – epithelioid leiomyosarcoma; SPS – spindle and pleomorphic sarcoma; +ve – positive; –ve – negative; ds – days; ws – weeks; ms – months.
Measure on the figure in original paper;
as far as can be determined from original paper. Time from symptom onset to outcome for those not annotated.