Retrospective Evaluation of The Cases with Malignant Pheochromocytoma: A Single Center Experience

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 3 Sayı: Supplement 1, 31 - 33, 07.03.2021

Yasemin Aydoğan Ünsal Özen Öz Gül Soner Cander Canan Ersoy Ensar Aydemir Coşkun Ateş Oktay Ünsal Erdinç Ertürk

https://doi.org/10.46310/tjim.876517

Öz

IIntroduction

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinicodemographic factors and features of tumors in patients with malignant pheochromocytoma.

Methods:

We retrospectively evaluated the data of 5 cases admitted to our department between 2013 and 2020 and diagnosed with malignant pheochromocytoma.

Results:

The patients included three females with mean age of 45 years at presentation. Three cases were diagnosed with pheochromocytoma after hypertensive attack and two cases were diagnosed after detection of adrenal mass. The average diameter of the adrenal mass of the cases was 58 mm. Extesion to periadrenal adipose tissue was detected in two patients, vascular invasion in one patient, and capsule invasion in 1 patient in the surgery-resected specimen. Intraabdominal lymph node metastasis was found in 1 patient and metastatic focus was seen in the liver in 1 patient at the time of the diagnosis. During follow-up, perirenal region metastasis was detected in 1 patient. Bone metastasis was seen in 3 patients, lymph node metastasis in 2 patients and lung metastasis in 1 patient. Transperitoneal surrenalectomy was performed in all cases. Lutetium-177, radiotherapy and surgery were the preferred adjuvant therapies. Three patients died because of progression of the disease or acute complications and the other 2 patients are still under follow-up in our clinic.

Conclusion:

Malignant pheochromocytoma is rare and definitive criteria for malignancy is not established. Prognosis is poor and there is no curative treatment. Resection of malignant pheochromocytoma with intent to cure, which may improve symptoms and possibly survival is important.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Malignant pheochromocytoma, surgery, metastasis, Lutetium-177, radiotherapy

Kaynakça

• Young W. F. Clinical presentation and diagnosis of pheochromocytoma. [İnternet]. Uptodate 2020 [Access 1 February 2021]. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/clinical-presentation-and-diagnosis-of pheochromocytoma ? search = pheocyromacytoma & source = search _ result&selectedTitle=1~150&usage_type=default&display_rank=1.
• Pacak K, Linehan WM, Eisenhofer G, et al. Recent advances in genetics, diagnosis, localization, and treatment of pheochromocytoma. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134:315-29.
• Guerrero MA, Schreinemakers JM, Vriens MR, et al. Clinical spectrum of pheochromocytoma. J Am Coll Surg 2009; 209:727-32.
• Tischler AS. Pheochromocytoma and extra-adrenal paraganglioma: updates. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008; 132: 1272–1284.
• Hamidi O, Young WF Jr, Iñiguez-Ariza NM, et al. Malignant Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma: 272 Patients Over 55 Years. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2017; 102: 3296-3305.
• Goldstein RE, O'Neill JA Jr, Holcomb GW 3rd, et al. Clinical experience over 48 years with pheochromocytoma. Ann Surg 1999; 229:755-64.
• Pattarino F, Bouloux PM. The diagnosis of malignancy in phaeochromocytoma. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 1996; 44: 239-41.
• Tischler AS, de Krijger RR, Gill AJ, et al. Phaeochromocytoma. In: WHO Classification of Tumours of Endocrine Organs, 4th edition, Lloyd RV, Osamura RY, Klöppel G, Rosai J (Eds), International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon 2017. p.183.
• Tanaka S, Ito T, Tomoda J, Higashi T, Yamada G, Tsuji T. Malignant pheochromocytoma with hepatic metastasis diagnosed 20 years after resection of the primary adrenal lesion. Intern Med. 1993;32: 789–794.
• Stein PP, Black HR. A simplified diagnostic approach to pheochromocytoma. A review of the literature and report of one institution's experience. Medicine (Baltimore) 1991; 70: 46-66.
• Baguet JP, Hammer L, Mazzuco TL, et al. Circumstances of discovery of phaeochromocytoma: a retrospective study of 41 consecutive patients. Eur J Endocrinol 2004; 150:681-6.
• Taïeb D, Sebag F, Hubbard JG, et al. Does iodine-131 meta-iodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scintigraphy have an impact on the management of sporadic and familial phaeochromocytoma? Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2004; 61: 102.
• Timmers HJ, Kozupa A, Chen CC, et al. Superiority of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to other functional imaging techniques in the evaluation of metastatic SDHB-associated pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 2262-69.
• Janssen I, Chen CC, Millo CM, et al. PET/CT comparing (68)Ga-DOTATATE and other radiopharmaceuticals and in comparison with CT/MRI for the localization of sporadic metastatic pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 43: 1784-91.
• Strajina V, Dy BM, Farley DR, et al. Surgical Treatment of Malignant Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma: Retrospective Case Series. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017; 24: 1546-50.
• Ellis RJ, Patel D, Prodanov T, et al. Response after surgical resection of metastatic pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma: can postoperative biochemical remission be predicted? J Am Coll Surg 2013; 217:489-96.
• Adjallé R, Plouin PF, Pacak K, Lehnert H. Treatment of malignant pheochromocytoma. Horm Metab Res. 2009;41(9): 687-696.
• Safford SD, Coleman RE, Gockerman JP, et al. Iodine -131metaiodobenzylguanidine is an effective treatment for malignant pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. Surgery. 2003; 134:956.
• Gürbüz M, Özyurt N, Kocaay A. F. et al. Malign Feokromasitoma Tanılı Bir Olgu ve Literatür Derlemesi. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası 2019; 72(2): 251-53.