Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 106213

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : July | Volume : 16 | Issue : 7 | Page : EC08 - EC12 Full Version

A Nine Years Histopathological Retrospective Study of Retroperitoneal Masses


Published: July 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/55303.16575
Kanchana Umashankar Telagavi, Bharati Mohan Bhavikatti, Purushottam Reddy

1. Assistant Professor, Department of Pathology, Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubballi, Karnataka, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Pathology, Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubballi, Karnataka, India. 3. Professor, Department of Pathology, Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubballi, Karnataka, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Bharati Mohan Bhavikatti,
House No. 86, Nrupatunga Park, Near Shakti Colony, Hubballi-580032, Karnataka, India.
E-mail: bhavikattib@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Retroperitoneum is potentially large space that allows both primary and metastatic tumours to grow silently before clinical signs and symptoms appear. However, retroperitoneal masses due to their unhinhibited growth and with no facial boundaries they are often attain large size before the development of symptoms and the establishment of a diagnosis. There are a vast number of neoplasms occurring in this region. Understanding the pathology and lesions is important, for early diagnosis and for treatment of these neoplasms.

Aim: To study the overall prevalence of primary and secondary retroperitoneal neoplasms and the varied histomorphological spectrum of retroperitoneal masses. Also to categorise the lesions as benign and malignant tumors of retroperitoneum.

Materials and Methods: This retrospective study was conducted in the Department of Pathology, Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences Hubballi, Karnataka, India from 2011 to 2019. A total of 39,757 speimens were recieved to histopathology section during this period. Among them, 53 (0.13%) were retroperitoneal tumours. Haematoxylin and Eosin stained slides were thoroughly analysed and categorised into non neoplastic, benign and malignant tumours. Further, based on the finer microscopic features, the accurate subtype of the tumour type was made. The descriptive statistics like mean, range and percentage are used.

Results: Total 53 cases of retroperitoneal tumours were studied of which 10 (18.9%) cases were primary retroperitoneal masses and 43 (81.1%) cases were secondary retroperitoneal masses. Mean age was 40.7 years with male to female ratio 1.5:1. Malignant lesions were more common accounting to 50.9% cases, followed by benign 22.64% cases, the rest were intermediate grade and inflammatory. Kidney lesions were most common secondary retroperitoneal masses, accounting for 41.5% cases, followed by pancreas 22.64% cases, adrenals 13.20% cases and Lymphnodes 3.7% cases. Primary retroperitoneal masses which accounted for 18.9% cases were, categorised histomorphologically as spindle cell tumours, adipocytic, small round cell tumours, cartilaginous origin and cystic lesions.

Conclusion: Diagnosis of retroperitoneal tumours is challenging due to their varied histomorphology and histopathology forms the gold standard for diagnosis.

Keywords

Retroperitoneum, Secondary neoplasms, Spindle cell tumours

The retroperitoneal space is the portion of the lumboiliac region limited anteriorly by the peritoneal covering, posteriorly by the posterior abdominal wall, superiorly by the twelfth rib and vertebra, inferiorly by the base of the sacrum and iliac crest, and laterally by the side borders of the quadratus lumborum muscles. Its contents, embedded in a meshwork of loose connective tissue are the adrenal glands, kidneys and ureters, aorta and its branches, inferior vena cava and its tributaries, and numerous lymph nodes (1).

This potentially large space allows both primary and metastatic tumours to grow silently before clinical signs and symptoms appear. The problem dealing with retroperitoneal masses is primarily due to their uninhibited growth with no facial boundaries often leading to the large size attained before the development of symptoms and the establishment of a diagnosis. The proximity to vital vascular and neural structures as well as intra abdominal organs adds to the problem (2).

There is very few research articles published in the literature, which have dealt with the retroperitoneal tumours in a nutshell. This study is undertaken to understand the spectrum of lesions occurring in this region. Further, histopathology is still the gold standard method to study and analyse these tumours. Ancillary techniques like immunohistochemistry, aid in confirming the diagnosis. Hence, histomorphological study of the retroperitoneal masses is critical for diagnosis.

Present study aimed to analyse the overall prevalence of primary and secondary retroperitoneal neoplasms and the varied histomorphological spectrum of retroperitoneal masses. Also to categorise the lesions as benign and malignant tumors of retroperitoneum.

Material and Methods

This retrospective study was conducted in the Department of Pathology at Karnataka Institute Of Medical Sciences, Hubballi, Karnatak, India, from 2011 to 2019. A total of 39,757 speimens were recieved to histopathology section during this period. Among them, 53 (0.13%) were retroperitoneal tumours. All procedures performed in the current study were approved by Institutional Ethical Committee in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Inclusion and Exclusion criteria: All the neoplastic and non neoplastic lesions arising in the retroperitoneal space were included in the study. Lesions arising in the intra peritoneum and the autolysed tissues were excluded from the study.

Procedure

The formalin fixed tissue specimens of retroperitoneal masses were received from the surgical departments and the tissue sections were properly processed and stained with Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E). The authors analysed the H&E stained slides which were retrieved from the Department Records. The data regarding the age,sex and the clinical findings were taken from the clinical database. The H&E stained slides were categorised into non neoplastic, benign and malignant tumours. Further, based on the finer microscopic features, the accurate subtype of the tumour type was made. In cases of soft tissue tumours, immunohistochemistry was performed, to ascertain the findings and final diagnosis was made.

Statistical Analysis

The descriptive statistics like mean, range and percentage are used. They are calculated and tabulated using Microsoft Excel 2017.

Results

Total 53 cases of retroperitoneal tumours were studied of which 10 (18.9%) cases were primary retroperitoneal masses and 43 (81.1%) cases were secondary retroperitoneal masses. The age ranged from 9 months to 72 years, mean of 40.7 years.

The study comprised of 32 (60.37%) males and 21 (39.63%) females. Male to female ratio is 1.5:1.

The majority of the cases were in the age group of 61-70 years comprising of 13 (24.52%) cases. The youngest case was, 9 months of age diagnosed as nephroblastoma and the eldest was 72 years diagnosed as pheochromocytoma (Table/Fig 1).

The kidney was the most commonly involved retroperitoneal organ in our study accounting to 22 (41.51%) cases, followed by pancreas 12 (22.64%) cases, primary retroperitoneal masses 10 (18.87%) cases, adrenals 7 (13.20%) cases and lymph nodes 2 (3.78%) cases as shown in (Table/Fig 2).

In the present study, malignant lesions were more common accounting for 27 (50.94%) cases, followed by benign 12 (22.64%) cases, 1 (1.89%) case of intermediate grade and 13 (24.53%) cases were inflammatory lesions. The distribution of non neoplastic and neoplastic lesions are shown in the (Table/Fig 3). Malignant and intermediate grade comprised a majority of the tumours, 28 (52.8%) and non neoplastic and benign were 25 (47.2%).

The retroperitoneal tumours are divided into primary and secondary tumours. The primary tumours include the tumours arising from the soft tissue of the retroperitoneum while the secondary tumours are the tumours arising from the solid organs in the retroperitoneum like, kidney, pancreas, adrenals and the lymph nodes. The results are compiled based on the frequency of occurrence.

1) Kidney: Nephrectomy was the predominant type of specimen we received of the total 22 cases. Among them, 16 (72.7%) were malignant tumours, 2 (9.09%) were benign and 4 (18.19%) cases were inflammatory. Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) was the most common malignant tumour. Ten cases (45.5%) of renal cell carcinoma was encountered, in the 5th and 6th decade, followed by 4 (18.18%) cases of Wilm’s tumour in younger age group, with age of presentation being 1st and 2nd decade of life and 2 (9.09%) cases of urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis in 7th decade of life. Two (9.09%) cases of benign tumours were encountered in 2nd and 6th decade. Four (18.18%) cases of chronic pyelonephritis presented in the 6th-7th decade of life. In RCC, the clear cell variant. was the most common histomorphological variant followed by the spindle cell variant of RCC (Table/Fig 4).

Of the two benign lesions, one case each of angiomyolipoma and medullary cystic kidney were encountered at 65 years and 21 years respectively (Table/Fig 5).

Four cases of non neoplastic lesions of kidney were studied, all were cases of chronic pyelonephritis. One was a case of tuberculosis pyelonephritis presenting at an age of 66 years (Table/Fig 6) and the rest three were cases of non specific chronic pyelonephritis presenting at 6th-7th decade. One of the cases showed hydrouretric changes.

2) Pancreas: Pancreatic tumours were the second most common secondary tumours in the retroperitoneum, in the present study comprising 12 (22.64%) cases. Among them, 9 (75%) of them were Pseudocyst of pancreas, presenting at 4th decade of life and 3 (25%) cases were malignant in 5th-6th decade. Three (25%) specimens of the whipples procedure were received, of which two were pancreatic adenocarcinoma presenting at 5th decade of life. The other case was a neuroendocrine carcinoma at 60 years of age. One of the pancreatic adenocarcinomas showed two distinctive components, a spindle cell component with osteoclastic giant cells and a adenocarcinoma component. This case was subjected to immunohistochemistry to rule out Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumour (GIST). Adenocarcinoma component was immunopositive for pancytokeratin, Cytokeratin 7 (CK7), SMAD4 and vimentin (Table/Fig 7). Spindle cell component was positive for vimentin. CD117 and CK20 was negative. A final diagnosis of Anaplastic carcinoma of pancreas with giant cells was reported.

3) Primary retroperitoneal masses: We encountered various mesenchymal lesions in primary retroperitoneal masses which were categorised histomorphologically as spindle cell tumours, adipocytic, small round cell tumours, cartilaginous origin and cystic lesions. Among them 5 (50%) cases were malignant, 1 (10%) was intermediate and 4 (40%) were benign.

Spindle cell tumours: Spindle cell pattern was the most commonly encountered histomorphological pattern among the primary peritoneal masses comprising of 4 (40%) cases. Among them, 2 (50%) were malignant,1 (25%) was intermediate grade and 1 (25%) was benign.

Among malignant spindle cell lesions, one case each of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour and malignant spindle cell tumour at 45years and 65 years of age respectively (Table/Fig 8).

The benign lesion was a case of cellular leiomyoma at 45 years of age.

One case of the intermediate grade of spindle cell tumour at an age of 40 years was studied. The intermediate grade tumour was an inflammatory pseudotumour.

Small round cell tumours: Two (20%) cases of small round cell tumours, were studied which was the second most common among the primary peritoneal masses encountered. Age of presentation was first decade of life. One case was subjected to immunohistochemistry and was positive for DESMIN. A final diagnosis of, Embryonal Rhadomyosarcoma, the specific type of SRCT was made.
Adipocytic tumours: Two (20%) cases of benign adipocytic lesions i.e Lipoma were studied. The age of presentation was 50years and 63 years.
Cartilaginous tumours: There was 1 (10%) case of chondrosarcoma- grade II, who presented at an age of 55 years.
Hamartomatous cyst: One (10%) case of hamartomatous cyst was encountered which had both epithelial and mesenchymal component. The cyst was lined by squamous and columnar epithelium.

4) Adrenals: Seven (12.96%) cases of adrenal lesions were encountered. Among them, 6 (85.71%) were benign and 1 (14.29%) was malignant. All six benign lesions were of pheochromocytoma of which, one presented as bilateral pheochromocytoma (Table/Fig 9). The most common age of presentation of these lesions was in the 4th decade of life. One malignant case was of Neuroblastoma at the age of 1 year.

5) Lymph node: There were 2 (3.71%) cases who presented as retroperitoneal lymphnodes. Both the cases were of non hodgkins lymphoma at 52 years and 40 years of age.

Discussion

Retroperitoneum is an area of curiosity and interest since long. Considering the numerous and heterogeneous contents of this region which includes adrenal, pancreas, kidney, rertroperitoneal lymphnode, gastrointestinal tract (second part of duodenum, ascending and descending colon) and retroperitoneum proper lesions can be encountered here (3). In the present study, 53 cases of retroperitoneal masses were encountered during the period of 2011 to 2019. The mean age of presentation was 40.7 years with age range being 9 months to 72 years which is in accordance with study by Gangopadhyay M et al., while study a by Mangal N et al.,had the majority of the cases in the 6th decade (4),(5).

Malignant lesions were more common among the retroperitoneal masses in the present study accounting for 27 (50.94%) and benign and non neoplastic lesions were 25 (47.2%). This was comparable with study by Mangal N et al., who also reported malignant masses as more common accounting for 47 (55.38%) and benign and non- neoplastic masses as 38 (44.7%) cases (5).

Kidney was the most common retroperitoneal organ to be involved accounting for 22 (41.51%) cases, followed by pancreas 12(22.64%) cases which is similar to Pant H et al., who found 17(34%) cases of renal origin followed by 14 (28%) cases as pancreatic origin (6). Studies by Mangal N et al., (5), Mehdi G et al., (7), Das A et al., (8) and Ahmad SS et al., (9) also found kidney was the most common retroperitoneal organ to be involved.

Kidney: In the present study, a total of 22 (41.51%) cases of kidney were studied and nephrectomy was the predominant type of specimen received. The malignant neoplasm was commonly observed in kidney accounting for the majority,16 (72.2%) of the cases. Renal cell carcinoma was the most common malignant tumour encountered in the present study in the 5th and 6th decade, which is similar to the findings by Md Rafique et al., (10) and Popat VC et al., (11). Clear cell RCC was the common histological pattern observed which was comparable with Agarwal D et al., Hashmi AA et al., and Latif F et al., (12),(13),(14). Wilms tumour was the next common malignant tumour observed in the 1st and 2nd decades of life. Agarwal D et al., found the incidence of Wilms tumour in the 1st decade of life (12).

Chronic pyelonephritis was the non neoplastic lesion encountered among which most were non specific while one case was TB pyelonephritis. However, Mangal N et al., found pyonephrosis as the most common non-neoplastic lesion (5).

Pancreas: In the present study, 12 (22.64)% were pancreatic lesions. The majority of the lesions were non neoplastic accounting for 9 (75%) while, 3 (25%) were malignant. Pancreatic lesions were more common in males than females. The non neoplastic lesion is the pseudocyst. However, Basina G et al., 27 (69.2%) were malignant and 11 (28.2%) were non neoplastic. But the sex distribution was similar (15).

Primary retroperitoneal masses: In the present study, 10(18.87%) cases, were primary tumours of retroperitoneum. They had varied morphology. Among them 5 (50% ) cases were malignant, 1(10%) case was intermediate and 4 (40%) were benign. Most of the lesions were in the 5th-6th decade. Small round cell tumours were in the 1st decade. Spindle cell sarcomas and small round cell sarcoma were common malignant lesions and adipocytic lesions were the common benign neoplasm.

The incidence of benign neoplasms is less common than the malignant neoplasms. This finding is similar to Das A et al., and Rekhi B et al., (8),(16).

Adrenals: Pheochromocytoma is the most common adrenal lesion encountered in the present study in the 4th decade of life, while neuroblastoma was found in an infant.

Kumari NS et al., also found pheochromocytoma as the common adrenal neoplasm (17). While Mangal N et al., found Neuroblastoma as common tumour (5).

Lymphnode: In the present study, non hodgkin’s lymphoma was the only lesion encountered in the retroperitoneal lymphnodes. Studies by Chakrabarti I et al., and Das A et al., found Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma as the commonest lesion (8),(18). They encountered metastatic adenocarcinoma as the next common lesion in lymphnodes.

Limitation(s)

The sample size was small as the cases were compiled and studied only upto 2019 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of surgeries was less during 2019 to 2021, only emergency surgeries were conducted during this period.

Conclusion

The diagnosis of retroperitoneal lesions is challenging. The retroperitoneal space allows the growth of both primary and secondary tumours silently before the appearance of clinical signs and symptoms. Most of the retroperitoneal masses are malignant. Accurate diagnosis of these neoplasms is critical for treatment. The sensitivity and specificity of Fine Needle Aspiration (FNA) smears is high but, histopathological pattern is of prime importance for further management. Hence, histopathology still holds the gold standard for diagnosis and further management. Ancillary tests aid in confirmation of the findings and also in making a final diagnosis.

References

1.
Peritoneum, retroperitoneum and related structures. In Rosai J editor, Rosai and Ackerman’s Surgical Pathology. Volume 2, Tenth edition, Missouri: Elsevier; 2011;2233-270. [crossref]
2.
Murtaza B, Saeed S, Khan NA, Malik IB, Mahmood A, Sharif MA, Satti AA. Retroperitoneal masses: Different clinical scenarios. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2008;20(4):161-64.
3.
Agrawal P, Gupta A. Role of image guided fine needle aspiration cytology in diagnosis of retroperitoneal lesions in pediatric population. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences. 2014;3(72):15290-297. [crossref]
4.
Gangopadhyay M, Bhattacharyya NK, Ray S, Chakrabarty S, Pandit N. Guided fine needle aspiration cytology of retroperitoneal masses-Our experience. J Cytol. 2011;28(1):20. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Mangal N, Sharma VK, Verma N, Agarwal AK, Sharma SP, Aneja S. Ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration cytology in the diagnosis of retroperitoneal masses: A study of 85 cases. J Cytol. 2009;26(3):97. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
Pant H, Shukla S, Ahmad R. Role of ultrasound in evaluation of retroperitoneal lesions. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences. 2016 Jul 4;5(53):3563-69. [crossref]
7.
Mehdi G, Maheshwari V, Afzal S, Ansari HA, Ahmad I. Image-guided fine-needle aspiration of retroperitoneal masses: The role of the cytopathologist. J Cytol. 2013;30(1):36. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Das A, Gahine R, Patre V, Hussain N. Retroperitoneal Tumor: A Silent Trespasser-Role of Image-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology with Histopathological Correlation in Early Diagnosis. Acta cytologica. 2019;63(3):189-97. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Ahmad SS, Akhtar K, Akhtar SS, Nasir A, Khalid M, Mansoor T. Ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of retroperitoneal masses. Journal of Cytology. 2007;24(1):41. [crossref]
10.
Rafique M. Nephrectomy: Indications, complications and mortality in 154 consecutive patients. J Pak Med Assoc. 2007;57(6):308-11.
11.
Popat VC, Kumar MP, Udani D, Mundra MP, Vora DN, Porecha MM. A study on culprit factors ultimately demanding nephrectomy. Internet J Urol. 2010;7(1):01-08. [crossref]
12.
Agarwal D, Mahajan P, Kaur S, Singh K, Kundu PR, Agarwal R. Histomorphological spectrum of renal tumors in resected nephrectomy specimens at a tertiary care hospital. European Journal of Pharmaceutical and Medical Research. 2019;6(1):371-75.
13.
Hashmi AA, Ali R, Hussain ZF, Faridi N. Clinicopathologic patterns of adult renal tumors in Pakistan. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(5):2303-307. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Latif F, Mubarak M, Kazi JI. Histopathological characteristics of adult renal tumours: A preliminary report. J Pak Med Assoc. 2011;61(3):224-28.
15.
Basina G, Moida SR, Kiranmayi DB, Bhaskar VR. Histopathological spectrum of Pancreatic and Periampullary lesions with special emphasis on malignant lesions and their prognosis based on histomorphology. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences. 2020:19(2):18-24.
16.
Rekhi B, Gorad BD, Kakade AC, Chinoy RF. Scope of FNAC in the diagnosis of soft tissue tumors-A study from a tertiary cancer referral center in India. Cytojournal. 2007;4:20. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Kumari NS, Sireesha A, Jayashree K, Kumar OS. Spectrum of histomorphological patterns of adrenal tumors: A one year study at Gandhi Hospital, Hyderabad- A tertiary referral centre. IAIM. 2016;3(7):77-86.
18.
Chakrabarti I, Bhowmik S, Sinha MG, Bera P. Ultrasound-guided aspiration cytology of retroperitoneal masses with histopathological corroboration: A study of 71 cases. J Cytol. 2014;31(1):15. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/55303.16575

Date of Submission: Jan 29, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Mar 16, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Apr 07, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jul 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Feb 02, 2022
• Manual Googling: Apr 01, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Apr 12, 2022 (11%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com