Abstract: Background: leiomyosarcoma of veins is a rare group of sarcomas of mesenchymal origin, which develops from smooth muscle cells of vascular . Vascular leiomyosarcoma occurs in 2-5% and have a slow growth. It is rather difficult to diagnose this disease on the basis of only clinical symptoms, most often patients are worried about oedema and pain in lower limbs. To establish the diagnosis, it is necessary to use data of instrumental methods of examination, such as ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and multispiral computed tomography (MSCT) with intravenous contrast enhancement, which allow to determine the tumor localization, prevalence, involvement of the vessel wall in the process, as well as to exclude distant metastases. The final diagnosis is made according to immunohistochemical studies. Aim: was to study the importance of radiadiagnostics methods in case of such rare disease as leiomyosarcoma of the external iliac vein. Material and methods: 67-year-old woman with complaints of oedema of the lower limb, was examined: an ultrasound study of inferior vena cava and veins of lower limbs, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and multispiral computed tomography (MSCT) with contrast enhancement, fine-needle aspiration biopsy Patient underwent operation: «removal of the pelvic retroperitoneal tumor with resection of the external iliac vein' segment and pelvic lymph node dissection.» Histological examination: leiomyosarcoma, G2 FNCLCC. Results: control MSCT - data on the recurrence of the iliac vein tumor and metastatic lesion of organs of chest, abdominal and pelvic cavity were not obtained. Conclusions: a complex of diagnostic methods allows you to properly diagnose. And among these methods, multiphase computed tomography is one of the best imaging method, which shows not only the localization of the tumor, but also helps in staging, excluding or confirming vein thrombosis, solving the issue of resectability of the tumor and identifying distant metastasis. References 1. Le Minh T, Cazaban D, Michaud J. et al. Great saphenous vein leiomyosarcoma: a rare malignant tumor of the extremity-two case reports. Ann Vasc Surg. 2004; 18(2): 234-236. 2. Yucel Yankol, Nesimi Mecit, Turan Kanmaz et al. Leiomyosarcoma of the retrohepatic vena cava: Report of a case treated with resection and reconstruction with polytetrafluoroethylene vascular graft. Ulus Cerrahi Derg 2015; 31: 162-165. 3. Tripodi E, Zanfagnin V, Fava C. et al. Leiomyosarcoma of the Right Iliac Veins presenting as a pelvic mass: a case report. Obstet. Gynecol. cases Rev. 2015; 2 (3): 1-4. 4. Mei Zhang, MDa, Feng Yan et al. Multimodal ultrasonographic assessment of leiomyosarcoma of the femoral vein in a patient misdiagnosed as having deep vein thrombosis: a case report. Medicine. 2017: 96(46): 1-5. 5. Pavlov A.YU., Garmash S.V., Isaev T.K. i dr. Sovremennye predstavleniya o lejomiosarkomah ven zabryushinnogo prostranstva. Obzor klinicheskih sluchaev. [Modern ideas about leiomyosarcoma veins retroperitoneal space. Review of clinical cases.] Onkourologiya. 2016; 12(2): 92-96 [in Russ]. 6. Watanabe K, Tajino T, Sekiguchi M. et al. h-Caldesmon as a Specific Marker for Smooth Muscle Tumors. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2000; 113 (5): 663-668. 7. Weiss SW, Goldblum JR. Enzinger and Weiss's Soft Soft Tissue Tumors. 6th ed. 8. Gonzales-Cantu Ye.M., Tena-Suck M.L., Serna-Reyna S. et al. Leiomyosarcoma of vascular origin: case report. Case Rep. in Clinical Pathology. 2015; 2(4): 60-64 9. Мацко Д.Е. Современные представления о морфологической классификации сарком мягких тканей и их практическое значение. Практическая онкология. 2013; 14 (2): 77-86. 10. Чуканов Е., Никитина О., Марио Таха. Лейомиосаркома нижней полой вены. Променева дагностика, променева терапiя. 2014; 4: 69-72. 11. Ahluwaliya A., Saggar K., Sandhu P. et al. Primary leiomyosarcoma of inferior vena cava: an unusual entity.. Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging. 2002; 12(4): 515-516. 12. Dzsinich C., Gloviczki P., Van Heerden J. A. et al. Primary venous leiomyosarcoma: a rare but lethal disease. Journal of Vascular Surger. 1992; 15(4): 595-603. 13. Kaprin A.D., Galkin V.N., Zhavoronkov L.P., Ivanov V.K., Ivanov S.A., Romanko Yu.S. Synthesis of basic and applied research is the basis of obtaining high-quality findings and translating them into clinical practice. Radiation and risk. 2017; 26(2): 26-40.
Abstract: Aim: was to estimate the diagnostic value of MRI (qualitative and tumor size analysis) in the evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy in patients with soft tissue sarcomas on different stages of examination. Material and methods: we analyzed data of 74 patients with soft tissue sarcomas. All patients underwent MRI. Patients were examined before, in the middle and at the end of the course of the preoperative chemotherapy Results: the sensitivity (predilection of Grade III-IV pathologic response) of qualitative MRI signs in the middle of the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (after 2-3 cycles) was 73%, the specificity (predilection of Grade I-II pathologic response) was 88%; 69% and 100% for maximum tumor size evaluation, correspondingly At the end of the preoperative treatment, values of the sensitivity and specificity of qualitative MRI signs decreased to 50% and 78%, respectively, the sensitivity of maximum tumor size estimation decreased to 31%, while specificity remained the same -100%. Conclusion: MRI with qualitative and tumor size analysis is an informative method in assessment of preoperative chemotherapy of soft tissue sarcomas. References 1. Fletcher C.D.M. WHO Classification of Tumors: Pathology and Genetics of Tumors of Soft Tissue and Bone. Lyon: IARC Press. 2002;312 p. 2. Putnam J.B. Metastases from Sarcoma American Cancer Society Atlas of Clinical Oncology: Soft Tissue Sarcomas. Hamiliton-Ontario: BC Decker Inc. 2002; 266-278. 3. Aliev M.D. Sovremennye podhody k lecheniju sarkommjagkih tkanej[Modern approaches to the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas.]. Prakticheskaja onkologija. 2004; 5(4):250- 255 [In Russ]. 4. Pisters P.W.T., Patel S.R, Varma D.G.K., et al. Preoperative chemotherapy for stage IIIB extremity soft tissue sarcoma: long term results from single institution. J. Clin.Oncol. 1997;15:3481-3487. 5. Gortzak E., Azzarelli A., Buesa J. et al. A randomized phase II study on neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for ‘high-risk’ adult soft-tissue sarcoma. Europ. J. Cacer. 2001; 37:1096-1103. 6. Lucas D.R., Kshirsagar M.P., Biermann J.S. et al. Histologic alterations from neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma: clinicopathological correlation. Oncologist. 2008;13( 4):451-458. 7. WHO Handbook for reporting results of cancer treatment. WHO Publication, Geneva. 1979;48:1-45. 8. Park J.O., Lee S.I., Song S.Y et al. Measuring response in solid tumors: comparision of RECIST and WHO response criteria. Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol. 2003; 33: 533-537. 9. Therasse P., Arbuck S.G., Eisenhauer E.A., et al.New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors (RECIST guidelines). J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205-216. 10. Eisenhauer E.A., Therasse P., Bogaerts J., et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur. J. Cancer. 2009;45: 228-247. 11. Tuma R.S. Sometimes size doesn’t matter: reevaluating RECIST and tumor response end points. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2006; 98: 1272-1274. 12. Gehan E.A., Tefft M.C. Will there be resistance to the RECIST (tumor Response Criteria in Solid Tumors. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2000; 92: 179-181. 13. Vanel D., Lacombe M.J., Couanet D. et al. Musculoskeletal tumors: follow-up with MR imaging after treatment with surgery and radiation therapy. Radiology. 1987; 164(1): 243-245. 14. Siegel M.J. Magnetic resonance imaging of musculoskeletal soft tissue masses. Radiol.Clin. North. Am. 2001; 39(4):701-720. 15. Fletcher B.D., Reddick W.E., Taylor J.S. Dynamic MR imaging of musculoskeletal neoplasm. Radiology. 1997; 200:869-872. 16. Biondetti P.R., Ehman R.L. Soft-tissue sarcomas: use of textural patterns in skeletal muscle as a diagnostic feature in postoperative MR imaging. Radiology. 1992:183(3):845-848. 17. Wang X., Jacobs M., Fayad L. Therapeutic Response in Musculoskeletal Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Evaluation by Magnetic Resonance Imaging. NMR Biomed. 2011;24(6):750-763. 18. Sanchez R.B., Quinn S.F., Walling A., et al Musculoskeletal neoplasms after intraarterial chemotherapy: correlation of MR images with pathologic specimens. Radiology. 1990;174:237-240. 19. Erlemann R., Sciuk J., Bosse A., et al. Response of osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma to preoperative chemotherapy: assessment with dynamic and static MR imaging and skeletal scintigraphy. Radiology. 1990; 175:791-796. 20. Glazer H.S., Lee K.T. J., Levitt R.G. et al Radiation fibrosis: differentiation from recurrent tumor by MR imaging. Radiology. 1985;156:721-726. 21. Glazkova T.G. Ocenka kachestva metodov diagnostiki i prognoza v medicine [Quality of assessment methods for diagnosis and prognosis in medicine.]. Vestnik ONC AMN Rossii. 1994;2:3-11 [In Russ]. 22. Eisenhauer E.A. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur. J. Cancer. 2009;45:228-247. 23. Tuma R.S. Sometimes size doesn’t matter: reevaluating RECIST and tumor response end points J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1272-1274. 24. Gehan E.A. Will there be resistance to the RECIST (tumor Response Criteria in Solid Tumors). J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2000;92:179-181. 25. Stacchiotti S., Collini P., Messina A. et al. High- grade soft-tissue sarcomas: tumor response assessment - pilot study to assess the correlation between radiologic and pathologic response by using RECIST and Choi criteria. Radiology. 2009;251:447-456. 26. Carl Jaffe C. Response assistment in clinical trials: Implications for sarcoma clinical trial design. Oncologist. 2008;13(2):14-18. 27. Choi H. Response evaluation of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. H. Choi. Oncologist. 2008;13(2):4-7.
