ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Due to rarity of duodenal GISTs, clinicians have few information about its clinical features, diagnosis, management and prognosis. CASE REPORT: We report a case of promptly diagnosed duodenal GIST in a 61-year-old Egyptian man presented shocked with severe attack of hematemesis and melena. Upper gastroduodenal endoscopy was done and revealed a large ulcerating bleeding mass at first part of duodenum 4 hemo-clips were applied with good hemostasis. An exploratory laparotomy and distal gastrectomy, duodenectomy and gastrojejunostomy were performed. The morphology of the mass combined with immunohistochemistry was consistent with duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) of high risk type. The patient is on amatinib one tablet daily and he was well with no evidence of tumor recurrence. CONCLUSION: despite being rare, emergency presentation with sudden severe, life-threatening hemorrhagic shock duodenal GISTs might be a cause of potentially lethal massive combined upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding which is the key feature of this rare and challenging tumor.
Subject(s)
Duodenal Neoplasms , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors , Shock, Hemorrhagic , Humans , Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors/complications , Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors/pathology , Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors/surgery , Male , Middle Aged , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Duodenal Neoplasms/complications , Duodenal Neoplasms/surgery , Duodenal Neoplasms/pathology , Shock, Hemorrhagic/etiology , Melena/etiology , Hematemesis/etiology , GastrectomyABSTRACT
Resumen OBJETIVO: Comparar la cirugía radical con la cirugía conservadora de la fertilidad en mujeres con cáncer de ovario epitelial en estadio 1A-C con respecto a la tasa de recurrencia y las tasas de supervivencia. Además, evaluar los desenlaces reproductivos y obstétricos para las mujeres con cáncer de ovario epitelial en estadio I tratadas con una conducta conservadora de la fertilidad. PACIENTES Y MÉTODOS: Estudio prospectivo efectuado en pacientes con cáncer de ovario epitelial, estadio I, con edad ≤ 40 años. A las pacientes del grupo de preservación de la fertilidad se les practicó salpingooforectomía del lado del ovario afectado y una biopsia por incisión o escisión en cuña del ovario contralateral. A las pacientes del grupo de cirugía radical se les practicó la histerectomía total y salpingooforectomía bilateral. Para evaluar los desenlaces reproductivos y oncológicos se dio seguimiento a todas las pacientes durante cinco años. RESULTADOS: Se estudiaron 60 pacientes; las del grupo de cirugía de preservación de la fertilidad eran significativamente más jóvenes (30 ± 4 en comparación con 35 ± 5) (p < 0.001), el tamaño de sus tumores era más pequeño 3.4 ± 1.3 en comparación con 6.0 ± 2,6 (p < 0.001), de menor grado (p < 0.001). = 0.011), estadio más precoz (p < 0.001) y con más histología mucinosa que las pacientes del grupo de cirugía radical. No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre ambos grupos en cuanto a la recurrencia tumoral o las tasas de supervivencia. De 25 pacientes operadas para preservación de la fertilidad 18 de 25 intentaron quedar embarazadas. Se registraron 15 de 18 embarazos, incluidos 13 nacidos vivos, 1 aborto espontáneo y 1 muerte fetal intrauterina. CONCLUSIÓN: La cirugía conservadora de la fertilidad podría ser una alternativa adecuada a la cirugía radical para mujeres jóvenes con cáncer epitelial de ovario en estadio I.
Abstract OBJECTIVE: In the current study, we aimed to compare between radical surgery and fertility saving surgery in females with stage 1A-C EOC regarding recurrence rate and patients survival rates in addition to evaluating reproductive and obstetric outcomes for stage I EOC females who were managed by fertility saving surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively identified 60 patients diagnosed with stage I EOC aged ≤ 40 years. Patients in the fertility-preservation group underwent salpingo-oophorectomy on the side of the affected ovary in addition to incisional biopsy or wedge excision of the ovary on the other side. Patients in the radical surgery group underwent total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. We followed up all patients for 5 years to assess their reproductive and oncological outcomes. RESULTS: Patients in the fertility preservation surgery group were significantly younger (30 ± 4 versus 35 ± 5) (p < 0.001), their tumor sizes were smaller 3.4 ± 1.3 versus 6.0 ± 2.6 (p < 0.001), of lower grade (p = 0.011), earlier stage (p < 0.001) and has more mucinous histology than patients in the radical surgery group. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding tumor recurrence or survival rates. Of 25 patients underwent fertility preservation surgery, 18/25 (72%) tried to get pregnant. 15/18 (83%) pregnancies were recorded, including 13 live births, 1 miscarriage, and 1 intrauterine fetal death. CONCLUSION: Fertility sparing surgery could be adequate alternative to radical surgery for young females with stage I EOC.
