Ensuring a Safe and Qualitative Diagnostic Biopsy for Retroperitoneal Sarcomas

Contenu principal de l'article

Kristin Kennedy Ambacher
Andrea Marie Ibrahim
Carolyn Nessim

Résumé

Retroperitoneal sarcomas represent one third of neoplasms in the retroperitoneum and as such are an important entity when evaluating masses in this area. They are often identified incidentally as they present with non-specific symptoms and are only detectable on physical exam when they have grown to a large size. This group of tumours is a challenge for physicians as it encompasses over 50 different histological subtypes and the course of treatment greatly depends on histopathological diagnosis. Biopsy of these lesions has recently become standard of care when evaluating a suspected retroperitoneal sarcoma. However, historically, there has been specula- tion over whether this practice promotes needle tract seeding resulting in local recurrence which has resulted in limited research on the topic. As such, there is a lack of literature describing the best parameters for a safe and effective biopsy of these lesions. Our ongoing research aims to identify biopsy parameters which yield a safe and qualitative diagnostic biopsy while minimizing complications and local recurrence with the goal of consistent and quality care for all patients presenting with retroperitoneal lesions.

RÉSUMÉ

Les sarcomes rétropéritonéaux constituent un tiers des néoplasmes du rétropéritoine, et représentent ainsi une entité importante lors de l’évaluation de masses dans cet espace. Ils sont souvent découverts fortuitement puisqu’ils se manifestent par des symptômes non spécifiques et sont seulement décelables à l’examen physique lorsqu’ils atteignent une taille considérable. Ce groupe de tumeurs représente un défi pour les médecins, car il comprend plus de 50 différents sous-types histologiques et le traitement dépend largement du diagnostic histopathologique. La biopsie de ces lésions est récemment devenue la norme en matière de soins pour l’évaluation d’un sarcome rétropéritonéal soupçonné. Toutefois, par le passé, certains ont suggéré que cette pratique puisse possiblement disséminer le cancer et causer une récidive locale, ce qui a limité la recherche sur le sujet. Ainsi, il existe un manque de littérature décrivant les paramètres optimaux pour effectuer une biopsie sécuritaire et efficace de ces lésions. Notre recherche en cours vise à identifier les paramètres de biopsie qui produisent une biopsie diagnostique sécuritaire et qualitative, tout en minimisant les complications et les risques de récidive locale, dans le but de fournir des soins uniformes et de haute qualité à tous les patients avec des lésions rétropéritonéales. 

Renseignements sur l'article

Rubrique
Review & Clinical Practice

Références

1. Al-Absi E, Farrokhyar F, Sharma R, et al. A systematic review and meta-analy- sis of oncologic outcomes of pre- versus postoperative radiation in localized resectable soft-tissue sarcoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(5):1367–74.
2. Van Roggen JFG, Hogendoorn PCW. Soft tissue tumours of the retroperito- neum. Sarcoma. 2000;4:17–26.
3. Strauss DC, Hayes AJ, Thomas JM. Retroperitoneal tumours: Review of man- agement. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011;93(4):275–80.
4. Canadian Cancer Society. Canadian Cancer Statistics 2016 [Internet]. Updat- ed Oct. 2016 [cited 2017 Mar 7]. Available from: http://www.cancer.ca/~/ media/cancer.ca/CW/cancer information/cancer 101/Canadian cancer sta- tistics/Canadian-Cancer-Statistics-2016-EN.pdf?la=en
5. Solla JA, Reed K. Primary retroperitoneal sarcomas. Am J Surg. 1986;152(5):496–8.
6. Lewis JJ, Leung D, Woodruff JM, Brennan MF. Retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma: analysis of 500 patients treated and followed at a single institu- tion. Ann Surg. 1998;228(3):355–65.
7. Windham TC, Pisters PWT. Retroperitoneal sarcomas. Cancer Control. 2005;12(1):36–43.
8. Potter DA, Glenn J, Kinsella T, et al. Patterns of recurrence in patients with high-grade soft-tissue sarcomas. J Clin Oncol. 1985;3(3):353–66.
9. Mazeron JJ, Suit HD. Lymph nodes as sites of metastases from sarcomas of soft tissue. Cancer. 1987;60(8):1800–8.
10. Blazer III DG, Sabel MS, Sondak VK. Is there a role for sentinel lymph node biopsy in the management of sarcoma? Surg Oncol. 2003;12(3):201–6.
11. European Sarcoma Network Working Group. Soft tissue and visceral sarcomas: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(Supplement 3):iii102-iii112.
12. Karakousis CP, Gerstenbluth R, Kontzoglou K, Driscoll DL. Retroperitoneal Sarcomas and Their Management. Arch Surg. 1995;130:1104–9.
13. Francis IR, Cohan RH, Varma DG, Sondak VK. Retroperitoneal sarcomas. Cancer Imaging. 2005;5:89–94.
14. Arca MJ, Sondak VK, Chang AE. Diagnostic procedures and pretreatment evaluation of soft tissue sarcomas. Semin Surg Oncol. 1994;10(5):323–31.
15. Berger-Richardson D, Swallow CJ. Needle tract seeding after percutaneous biopsy of sarcoma: Risk/benefit considerations. Cancer. 2016.
16. Lahat G, Madewell JE, Anaya DA, et al. Computed tomography scan-driven selection of treatment for retroperitoneal liposarcoma histologic subtypes. Cancer. 2009;115(5):1081–90.
17. Pham V, Henderson-Jackson E, Doepker MP, et al. Practical Issues for Retro-peritoneal Sarcoma. Cancer Control 2016;23(3):249-64.
18. Trans-Atlantic RPS Working Group. Management of Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcoma (RPS) in the Adult: A Consensus Approach From the Trans-Atlantic
RPS Working Group. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(1):256–63.
19. Miah AB, Hannay J, Benson C, et al. Optimal management of primary retro-peritoneal sarcoma: an update. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2014;14(5):565–79.
20. Strauss DC, Hayes AJ, Thomas JM. Preoperative core needle biopsy is safe and does not affect oncological outcome in retroperitoneal sarcoma. CTOS 17th Annu Meet. 2012.
21. Wilkinson MJ, Martin JL, Khan AA, Hayes AJ, Thomas JM, Strauss DC. Percutaneous core needle biopsy in retroperitoneal sarcomas does not influence local recurrence or overall survival. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(3):853–8.
22. Berger-Richardson D, Nessim C, Burtenshaw S, Gladdy R, Gronchi, A, Fiore M SC. Early and Late Complications of Percutaneous Biopsy of Retroperitoneal Masses at Three Tertiary Sarcoma Centers. In: Society of Surgical Oncology. 2017.
23. Hwang SY, Warrier S, Thompson S, Davidson T, Yang JL, Crowe P. Safety and accuracy of core biopsy in retroperitoneal sarcomas. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2016;12(1):e174–8.
24. Wu JS, Goldsmith JD, Horwich PJ, Shetty SK, Hochman MG. Bone and soft- tissue lesions: what factors affect diagnostic yield of image-guided core-needle biopsy? Radiology. 2008;248(3):962–70.
25. Fishman JE, Milikowski C, Ramsinghani R, Velasquez MV, Aviram G. US-guided core-needle biopsy of the breast: How many specimens are necessary? Radiology. 2003;226(3):779–82.
26. Carrino J, Khurana B, Ready J, Silverman S, Winalski C. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Percutaneous Biopsy of Musculoskeletal Lesions. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2007;89(10):2179–87.
27. Kachroo P, Pak PS, Sandha HS, et al. Chest Wall Sarcomas are Accurately Diagnosed by Image-Guided Core Needle Biopsy. J Thorac Oncol. 2012;7(1):151–6.
28. van Dalen T, van Coevorden F, van Geel A, Hoekstra H, Hennipman A. A biopsy of a suspected soft tissue sarcoma in the retroperitoneal space; the diagnostic yield and the risk of contamination of the different procedures. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37:S84.