Unexpected Uterine Leiomyosarcoma After Hysterectomy for Presumed Leiomyoma: A Case Report

Authors

  • Muh Lingga Primananda School of Medicine, Universitas Internasional Batam, Batam, Indonesia
  • Aries Maulana School of Medicine, Universitas Internasional Batam, Batam, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4696-2407
  • Jasa Nita Listiana School of Medicine, Universitas Internasional Batam, Batam, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4918-4567
  • Muh Arfan School of Medicine, Universitas Internasional Batam, Batam, Indonesia
  • Ivy Tania School of Medicine, Universitas Internasional Batam, Batam, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22487/2tyt7840

Keywords:

Histopathology, Leiomyoma, Leiomyosarcoma, Smooth muscle tumor, Uterus

Abstract

Background: Uterine leiomyosarcoma is a rare malignant smooth muscle tumor that may remain unsuspected until definitive histopathological examination. Objectives: To describe diagnostic discordance between benign preoperative and gross impressions and malignant microscopic findings in uterine leiomyosarcoma. Methods: This case report retrospectively describes clinical presentation, computed tomography findings, surgical management, histopathological examination, and immunohistochemical results. Results: A 47 year old multiparous woman presented with six months of progressive abnormal uterine bleeding and abdominal enlargement. Non contrast computed tomography revealed a well circumscribed intramural uterine mass measuring 7.0 × 6.8 × 7.0 cm without detectable extrauterine disease. Total abdominal hysterectomy was performed for presumed leiomyoma. Gross examination revealed a firm whorled mass without evident hemorrhage or geographic necrosis. Microscopy demonstrated moderate to severe cytologic atypia, coagulative tumor cell necrosis, and more than 10 mitoses per 10 high power fields. Strong desmin and h caldesmon positivity supported smooth muscle differentiation. The patient was referred for multidisciplinary oncologic assessment. Conclusions: Benign appearing imaging and gross morphology cannot exclude uterine leiomyosarcoma. Accurate diagnosis requires adequate histological sampling and integrated clinicopathological assessment.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

  • Muh Lingga Primananda, School of Medicine, Universitas Internasional Batam, Batam, Indonesia

    Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Awal Bros Hospital, Batam, Indonesia

References

1. Yang Q, Madueke Laveaux OS, Cun H, et al. Comprehensive review of uterine leiomyosarcoma: pathogenesis, diagnosis, prognosis, and targeted therapy. Cells. 2024;13(13):1106. doi:10.3390/cells13131106

2. Ray Coquard I, Casali PG, Croce S, et al. ESGO EURACAN GCIG guidelines for the management of patients with uterine sarcomas. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2024;34(10):1499–1521. doi:10.1136/ijgc-2024-005823

3. Ricci S, Stone RL, Fader AN. Uterine leiomyosarcoma: epidemiology, contemporary treatment strategies and the impact of uterine morcellation. Gynecol Oncol. 2017;145(1):208–216. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.02.019

4. Cao H, Li L, Yang B, Luo G, Lou J, Xi M. Unexpected uterine sarcomas after hysterectomy and myomectomy for presumed leiomyoma: a retrospective study of 26,643 patients. Cancer Manag Res. 2019;11:7007–7014. doi:10.2147/CMAR.S208405

5. Tantitamit T, Huang KG, Manopunya M, Yen CF. Outcome and management of uterine leiomyosarcoma treated following surgery for presumed benign disease: review of literature. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2018;7(2):47–55. doi:10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_10_18

6. Raffone A, Raimondo D, Neola D, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of MRI in the differential diagnosis between uterine leiomyomas and sarcomas: a systematic review and meta analysis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2024;165(1):22–33. doi:10.1002/ijgo.15136

7. Woo S, Beier SR, Tong A, Hindman NM, Vargas HA, Kang SK. Utility of ADC values for differentiating uterine sarcomas from leiomyomas: systematic review and meta analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2024;223(3):e2431280. doi:10.2214/AJR.24.31280

8. Höhn AK, Brambs CE, Hiller GGR, May D, Schmoeckel E, Horn LC. Practical diagnostic aspects of uterine leiomyosarcoma in the context of the 2020 WHO classification. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2021;81(10):1145–1153. doi:10.1055/a-1545-4279

9. Tinelli A, D’Oria O, Civino E, et al. Smooth muscle tumor of uncertain malignant potential: a comprehensive multidisciplinary update. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023;59(8):1371. doi:10.3390/medicina59081371

10. Nielsen GP, Oliva E, Young RH, Rosenberg AE, Prat J, Scully RE. Diagnostic immunohistochemistry in uterine sarcomas: a study of 397 cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2011;30(3):222–232. doi:10.1097/PGP.0b013e318200caff

11. Chen L, Yang B. Immunohistochemical analysis of p16, p53, and Ki 67 expression in uterine smooth muscle tumors. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2008;27(3):326–332. doi:10.1097/PGP.0b013e31815ea7f5

12. Prat J. FIGO staging for uterine sarcomas. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009;104(3):177–178. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.12.008

13. Zivanovic O, Leitao MM, Iasonos A, et al. Stage specific outcomes of patients with uterine leiomyosarcoma: a comparison of FIGO and AJCC staging systems. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(12):2066–2072. doi:10.1200/JCO.2008.19.8366

14. Miettinen M, Fetsch JF. Evaluation of biological potential of smooth muscle tumours. Histopathology. 2006;48(1):97–105. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.2005.02225.x

15. Bell SW, Kempson RL, Hendrickson MR. Problematic uterine smooth muscle neoplasms: a clinicopathologic study of 213 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1994;18(6):535–558.

16. Ip PP, Cheung AN, Clement PB. Uterine smooth muscle tumors of uncertain malignant potential: a clinicopathologic analysis of 16 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33(7):992–1005.

17. Travaglino A, Raffone A, Gencarelli A, et al. p53, p16 and Ki 67 as immunohistochemical prognostic markers in uterine smooth muscle tumors of uncertain malignant potential. Pathol Res Pract. 2021;226:153592.

18. Mäkinen N, Aavikko M, Heikkinen T, et al. Exome sequencing of uterine leiomyosarcomas identifies frequent mutations in TP53, ATRX, and MED12. PLoS Genet. 2016;12(2):e1005850. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1005850

19. Cui RR, Wright JD, Hou JY. Uterine leiomyosarcoma: a review of recent advances in molecular biology, clinical management and outcome. BJOG. 2017;124(7):1028–1037. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.14579

20. Amant F, Coosemans A, Debiec Rychter M, Timmerman D, Vergote I. Clinical management of uterine sarcomas. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(12):1188–1198. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70226-8

21. Maulana A, Masadah R, Nelwan BJ, Ghaznawie M, Miskad UA, Tawali S. Stratifikasi risiko hiperplasia endometrium dan kanker endometrium tipe endometrioid berdasarkan faktor demografi, gejala ginekologi dan ekspresi beta catenin. Healthy Tadulako Journal (Jurnal Kesehatan Tadulako). 2024;10(2):282–292. doi:10.22487/htj.v10i2.1150

22. Fardillah N, Cangara MH, Kaelan C, et al. Pola ekspresi protein p53 pada astrositoma berdasarkan grading histopatologi. Healthy Tadulako Journal (Jurnal Kesehatan Tadulako). 2023;9(2):148–156. doi:10.22487/htj.v9i2.731

23. Hutasoit GA, Sari P, Rupawan IK, Salman M. Tumor phyllodes dan prognosisnya. Healthy Tadulako Journal (Jurnal Kesehatan Tadulako). 2022;8(3):204–213. doi:10.22487/htj.v8i3.476

24. D’Angelo E, Prat J. Uterine sarcomas: a review. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;116(1):131–139. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.09.023

25. Kapp DS, Shin JY, Chan JK. Prognostic factors and survival in 1396 patients with uterine leiomyosarcomas: emphasis on impact of lymphadenectomy and oophorectomy. Cancer. 2008;112(4):820–830. doi:10.1002/cncr.23245

26. 26. George S, Serrano C, Hensley ML, Ray Coquard I. Soft tissue and uterine leiomyosarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(2):144–150. doi:10.1200/JCO.2017.75.9845

Downloads

Published

2026-10-31

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Unexpected Uterine Leiomyosarcoma After Hysterectomy for Presumed Leiomyoma: A Case Report. (2026). Healthy Tadulako Journal (Jurnal Kesehatan Tadulako), 12(4), 682-689. https://doi.org/10.22487/2tyt7840

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.