Journal of pediatric surgery · 2018
Combined management of perianal rhabdomyosarcoma with chemotherapy, radical surgery, and irradiation: A series of three consecutive children.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Koivusalo Antti I, Rintala Risto J, Pakarinen Mikko P
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIM: We describe a series of three successive patients with perianal rhabdomyosarcoma (PRMS) from 2014 to 2017 managed with combined chemotherapy, radical surgery, and radiotherapy.
METHODS: Ethical consent was obtained. Data including tumor presentation, treatment, and survival was collected from hospital reports.
RESULTS: Two girls aged 15 and 16 years (patient #1 and #2) and one boy aged five years (patient #3) were referred because of a suspected perianal abscess. MRI showed large perianal tumors from 7 to 12 cm in diameter that surrounded or infiltrated the anal sphincters and were inconsistent with abscess. Tumor biopsies showed RMS of alveolar (#1 and #2) and embryonal (#3) types. Patient #1 had lymph node and bone metastases, patient #2 lymph node metastases, and patient #3 no metastases. Pretreatment staging, IRS Clinical Group, and Risk Groups were: Stage 4, II, high; Stage 3, GII, intermediate; and Stage 3, I, low, respectively. All underwent colostomy before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CWS-RMS 2009 program). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy failed to clear the tumors from anal sphincters preventing anus-saving surgery, and all patients underwent abdominoperineal excision. All removed specimens had free margins with negative lymph nodes. After adjuvant chemotherapy and local radiation, the patients were tumor free after 48, 13, and 18 months.
CONCLUSION: In PRMS local surgical control required abdominoperineal excision. Confusion between PRMS and abscess may cause unnecessary delay in management.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (Treatment Study, Case Series with no Comparison Group).
METHODS: Ethical consent was obtained. Data including tumor presentation, treatment, and survival was collected from hospital reports.
RESULTS: Two girls aged 15 and 16 years (patient #1 and #2) and one boy aged five years (patient #3) were referred because of a suspected perianal abscess. MRI showed large perianal tumors from 7 to 12 cm in diameter that surrounded or infiltrated the anal sphincters and were inconsistent with abscess. Tumor biopsies showed RMS of alveolar (#1 and #2) and embryonal (#3) types. Patient #1 had lymph node and bone metastases, patient #2 lymph node metastases, and patient #3 no metastases. Pretreatment staging, IRS Clinical Group, and Risk Groups were: Stage 4, II, high; Stage 3, GII, intermediate; and Stage 3, I, low, respectively. All underwent colostomy before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CWS-RMS 2009 program). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy failed to clear the tumors from anal sphincters preventing anus-saving surgery, and all patients underwent abdominoperineal excision. All removed specimens had free margins with negative lymph nodes. After adjuvant chemotherapy and local radiation, the patients were tumor free after 48, 13, and 18 months.
CONCLUSION: In PRMS local surgical control required abdominoperineal excision. Confusion between PRMS and abscess may cause unnecessary delay in management.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (Treatment Study, Case Series with no Comparison Group).