Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Case report
  • Open Access

Gastric inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor treated with combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection: a case report

World Journal of Surgical Oncology201816:161

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-018-1460-0

  • Received: 3 April 2018
  • Accepted: 1 August 2018
  • Published:

Abstract

Background

Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor is an uncommon soft tissue neoplasm rarely reported in the stomach.

Case presentation

We identified a tumor highly suggestive of poorly differentiated gastric adenocarcinoma in the lesser curvature of the stomach of a 53-year-old female during screening endoscopy. Although the patient’s gastric biopsy did not reveal cancer, the tumor configuration was strongly suspicious for malignancy, and we performed a gastric wedge resection using a combined laparoscopic and endoscopic method. The lesion was diagnosed as inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor based on its morphological and immunohistological features.

Conclusions

Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor should be considered in the differential diagnosis of soft tissue tumors in the stomach. We present a case of inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor safely treated with combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection.

Keywords

  • Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor
  • Stomach
  • Combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection

Background

Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor (IMT) is an uncommon soft tissue neoplasm. The first reported IMT was identified in the lungs in 1937 [1]. IMT most commonly occurs in the pulmonary system of children and young adults [2] and exhibits variable biological behavior ranging from the typical benign type to more aggressive variants [3]. Gastric IMT is extremely rare, and there are no guidelines for its treatment. We present the case of a 53-year-old female with gastric IMT that was difficult to diagnose but effectively treated with combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection.

Case presentation

A 53-year-old female presented with an asymptomatic gastric tumor found incidentally during screening upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The lesion appeared as a flat protrusion in the lesser curvature of the lower third of the stomach (Fig. 1a). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) showed a 23 × 12-mm, hypovascular, heterogeneous lesion thickening the second and third gastric layers. The findings strongly suggested scirrhous gastric cancer (Fig. 1b). Although the lesion biopsy revealed no evidence of malignancy, our suspicion of scirrhous gastric carcinoma persisted due to the configuration of the tumor and our EUS findings. We performed an endoscopic open biopsy to make an accurate diagnosis. However, evaluation of the specimen revealed only slight chronic inflammatory cell invasion. Computed tomography (CT) scanning showed only gastric wall thickening at the angle of the stomach (Fig. 1c). Positron emission tomography-CT showed no evidence of metastasis or abnormal uptake in the tumor (Fig. 1d). The laboratory findings were normal as were levels of tumor markers (CEA, 1.6 ng/ml; CA19-9, 12 U/ml).
Fig. 1
Fig. 1

a Endoscopy reveals a flat protrusion in the lesser curvature of lower third of the stomach. b Endoscopic ultrasound shows the tumor thickening the second and third layers of the stomach wall. c Computed tomography (CT) scanning shows the thickened wall at the angle of the stomach (white arrow), but no evidence of tumor metastasis. d Positron emission tomography-CT shows no evidence of tumor metastasis or abnormal uptake in the tumor

In spite of these findings, given our high level of suspicion, we decided to perform surgery to obtain a definitive diagnosis and treat the tumor. We chose gastric wedge resection using a combined laparoscopic and endoscopic method for several reasons. Firstly, the biopsy did not show cancer, but the tumor configuration strongly suggested malignancy; therefore, we selected a non-exposed method to prevent interoperative dissemination of tumor cells. Secondly, the tumor appeared to be a submucosal tumor (SMT), and gastric wedge resection using a combined laparoscopic and endoscopic method is among the safest procedures for resection of gastric SMTs [4, 5]. Lastly, we chose a wedge resection because if the tumor was not malignant, a distal gastrectomy could be considered excessive. We obtained an interoperative pathological diagnosis, and we planned to perform partial gastric resection in the absence of malignancy and laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with lymph node dissection if cancer was identified.

Surgical procedure

The first port was inserted through the umbilicus using an open technique. Four additional ports were inserted: the second in the subcoastal arch, the third at the mid-point between the camera port and the second port, and the fourth port and fifth port symmetrically. The first, second, and third ports were 12 mm. The fourth and fifth ports were 5 mm.

The lesser curvature gastric tumor was easily recognized laparoscopically. Our intraabdominal examination revealed a scar-like tumor with twitch. After preparation of lesser curvature vessels, the tumor periphery was viewed endoscopically. The entire circumference of the tumor was marked to ensure an approximately 0.5-cm margin from the tumor edge (Fig. 2a). We then injected indigo carmine into the gastric submucosal layer with an endoscopic needle. The seromuscular dissection was performed using a laparoscopic electrocautery scalpel (Fig. 2b). The specimen was pulled up along with the surrounding mucosa. A full-layer resection including the specimen was achieved using a laparoscopic stapling device (Fig. 2c). We used a hand-sewn technique for seromuscular suturing so the staple line would not be exposed (Fig. 2d). Finally, we inserted the endoscope into the duodenum to ensure that there was no gastric stenosis.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2

a The tumor circumference is marked to ensure an approximately 0.5-cm margin from the tumor edge using electrocautery. b Interoperative image showing the stomach after the seromuscular dissection was performed using a laparoscopic electrocautery scalpel. c The specimen is pulled up before performing full-thickness resection with a laparoscopic stapling device. d The seromuscular defect is sutured using a hand-sewn technique to avoid exposure of the staple line

Clinical outcome

The patient had gastric hypoperistalsis on postoperative day (POD) 1. We inserted a gastric tube; however, we planned for an extended period with no oral intake in case of persistent hypoperistalsis. On POD 4, a W-elemental diet (W-ED) tube was inserted to drain the stomach and provide nutrition. We started the patient on continuous low-dose erythromycin, mosapride citrate, and Rikkunshi-Tou to treat her hypoperistalsis. The W-ED tube was removed on POD 11 after an oral contrast study confirmed gastric motility. On the same day, oral intake was initiated. The patient was discharged from the hospital on POD 18.

Pathological findings

Interoperative pathological findings

The submucosa tumor could be seen in the resected specimen. The tumor had 20 mm × 20 mm × 13 mm size, including spindle cells with myxoid changes and collagen fibers. There was no evidence of adenocarcinoma. In this findings, fibromatosis can be a differential diagnosis.

Final pathological findings

Spindle tumor cells were identified in the gastric wall from the submucosa to the serosa accompanied by myxoid changes and collagen fibers in the stroma (Fig. 3a and b). The spindle cells were strongly immunopositive for alpha-smooth muscle actin, and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), but immunonegative for c-kit, desmin, and S-100. CD34, bcl-2, beta-catenin, CD31, pankeratin, platelet-derived growth factor-A, and DOG1 were almost immunonegative (Fig. 3c and d). Based on these findings, the tumor was diagnosed as gastric IMT.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3

a, b Spindle tumor cells are present in the gastric wall from the submucosa to the serosa accompanied by myxoid changes and collagen fibers in the stroma (H&E; × 10, × 100). c, d The tumor cells are strongly immunopositive for anaplastic lymphoma kinase (× 10, × 100)

Discussion and conclusions

IMT is considered an inflammatory pseudotumor, and there has been a debate as to whether it is benign or malignant [1, 3]. It is currently classified as an intermediate neoplasm according to the World Health Organization Histological Typing of Soft Tissue Tumors [6, 7]. IMT, although originally reported in the lung, is now recognized to occur in a variety of extrapulmonary sites ranging from the brain to the bladder [8]. Nevertheless, primary gastric IMT in adult is extremely rare [9], and almost all reported cases have been associated with symptoms such as abdominal pain or upper gastrointestinal bleeding [10]. Our case has two notable features: the method of treatment was gastric wedge resection using a combined laparoscopic and endoscopic method, and this patient had no symptoms.

Our review of 23 gastric IMT cases [9, 1123] reported since 2000 is detailed in Table 1. The mean tumor size in the 23 cases was 7.4 cm. The most common surgical treatment was partial gastrectomy (9 cases, 39.1%) followed by partial gastrectomy combined with another organ resection (4 cases, 17.4%). Simultaneous resection was necessary in over 17% of cases because the IMT was found after it grew large enough to invade other organs. Only one case was treated by endoscopic mucosal resection. To the best of our knowledge, this report is the first to describe IMT treated with combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection.
Table 1

Clinicopathologic features and surgery method in 23 cases of inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor

Age

 Range

2–80

 Mean

35.9

Sex

 Male

11 (47.8%)

 Female

12 (52.2%)

Tumor location

 Upper third

10 (43.5%)

 Middle third

6 (26.1%)

 Lower third

5 (21.7%)

 Unknown

2 (8.7%)

Tumor size (cm)

 Range

1.8–15

 Mean

7.4

Mitosis (HPF)

 Range

1–2

 Mean

1

ALK

 Positive

8 (34.8%)

 Negative

6 (26.1%)

 Not available

9 (39.1%)

Surgery

 Distal gastrectomy

3 (13.0%)

 Partial gastrectomy

9 (39.1%)

 Total gastrectomy

1 (4.3%)

 Wedge resection

1 (4.3%)

 Partial gastrectomy with other organ resection

4 (17.4%)

 Sleeve gastrectomy

1 (4.3%)

 Combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection

1 (4.3%)

 EMR

1 (4.3%)

 Unknown and other

2 (8.7%)

In this case, IMT was incidentally found on screening endoscopy. Fortunately, the lesion was relatively small and amenable to combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection. The surgery was conducted safely with minimal blood loss and took 102 min. The tumor was completely resected from the patient’s stomach.

The IMT was ALK-positive. ALK expression may be associated with a more favorable prognosis in IMT [2426], although consensus on this point has not yet been achieved. Because this tumor showed ALK expression and may have been found in an early stage, the patient’s prognosis might be favorable. Nine months after the surgery, this patient has no recurrence of the tumor. However, as IMT has malignant potential, the patient should continue follow-up CT and endoscopy.

We present a case of IMT that was very difficult to diagnose preoperatively. This lesion was safely and successfully treated with combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection, a novel approach to IMT treatment. IMT should be considered in the differential diagnosis of a soft tissue gastric tumor, and combined laparoscopic and endoscopic gastric wedge resection could be a surgical treatment in cases of IMT.

Abbreviations

ALK: 

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase

CT: 

Computed tomography

EMR: 

Endoscopic mucosal resection

EUS: 

Endoscopic ultrasound

HPF: 

High power field

IMT: 

Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor

SMT: 

Submucosal tumor

W-ED: 

W-elemental diet

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the patient for allowing us to use her clinical data to write this case report.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article is included within the article.

Authors’ contributions

All authors were involved in the preparation of this manuscript. MH collected the data, and wrote the manuscript. HK and SM performed the operation. RN, KS, NW, and YK designed the study. MH summarized the data and revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent for publication

This patient provided us the oral consent for the publication of this case report and accompanying images.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Keio University, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 160-8582, Japan

References

  1. Jadhav M, Harvi R, Patil R, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the stomach presenting as an exophytic mass - a diagnostic dilemma. Turk Patoloji Derg. 2017; https://doi.org/10.5146/tjpath.2017.01388.
  2. Rezaii Salim M, Vahedi H, Salimi Z, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the small bowel: a case report. Middle East J Dig Dis. 2011;3:134–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Katakwar A, Gedam BS, Mukewar S, et al. Primary gastric inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor in an adult-case report with brief review. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2014;5:66–70.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Shoji Y, Takeuchi H, Goto O, et al. Optimal minimally invasive surgical procedure for gastric submucosal tumors. Gastric Cancer. 2017; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-017-0750-5.
  5. Matsuda T, Nunobe S, Ohashi M, et al. Laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) for the upper gastrointestinal tract. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;2:40. https://doi.org/10.21037/tgh.2017.03.20.PubMedPubMed CentralView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Coffin CM, Patel A, Perkins S, et al. ALK1 and p80 expression and chromosomal rearrangements involving 2p23 in inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor. Mod Pathol. 2001;14:569–76.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cessna MH, Zhou H, Sanger WG, et al. Expression of ALK1 and p80 in inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor and its mesenchymal mimics: a study of 135 cases. Mod Pathol. 2002;15:931–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Coffin CM, Watterson J, Priest JR, et al. Extrapulmonary inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor (inflammatory pseudotumor). A clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of 84 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1995;19:859–72.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Ayushi J, Shweta K, Dilip R, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the stomach in an adult female – report of a rare case and review of the literature. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2012;4:399–405.Google Scholar
  10. Shi H, Wei L, Sun L, et al. Primary gastric inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of 5 cases. Pathol Res Pract. 2010;206:287–91.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Sanders BM, West KW, Gingalewski C, et al. Inflammatory pseudotumor of the alimentary tract: clinical and surgical experience. J Pediatr Surg. 2001;36:169–73.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Qiu JF, Shi YJ, Fang L, et al. High fever as an initial symptom of primary gastric inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor in an adult woman. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2014;7:1468–73.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Cho MY, Min YK, Kim NR, et al. Fever of unknown origin as a presentation of gastric inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor in a two-year-old boy. J Korean Med Sci. 2002;17:699–703.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Karnak Ǐ, Senocak ME, Ciftci AO, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor in children: diagnosis and treatment. J Pediatr Surg. 2001;36:908–12.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Al-Taie OH, Mörk H, Jenett M, et al. Fast-growing gastric inflammatory pseudotumor: a rare manifestation of peptic ulcer disease. Endoscopy. 2002;34:239.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Park SH, Kim JH, Min BW, et al. Exophytic inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the stomach in an adult woman: a rare cause of hemoperitoneum. World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:136–9.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Kim KA, Park CM, Lee JH, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the stomach with peritoneal dissemination in a young adult: imaging findings. Abdom Imaging. 2004;29:9–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Bjelovic M, Micev M, Spica B, et al. Primary inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the stomach in an adult woman: a case report and review of the literature. World J Surg Oncol. 2013;11:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-11-35.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Albayrak F, Dursun H, Albayrak Y, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the stomach in an adult woman: a rare intermittent cause of gastric outlet obstruction. Tumori. 2010;96:492–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Leon CJ, Castillo J, Mebold J, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the stomach: an unusual complication after gastrectomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63:347–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lazure T, Ferlicot S, Gauthier F, et al. Gastric inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors in children: an unpredictable course. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2002;34:319–22.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Shah SM, Sussman D, Jorda M, et al. EUS with EMR of an inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor of the stomach. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;67:561–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Mohammad Hoseini-Azar M, Mokhtare M, Zare-Mirzaie A, et al. Fever, weight loss and early satiety due to gastric inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor; case report and literature review. Middle East J Dig Dis. 2016;8:138–42.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Coffin CM, Hornick JL, Fletcher CD, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor: comparison of clinicopathologic, histologic, and immunohistochemical features including ALK expression in atypical and aggressive cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31:509–20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Chan JK, Cheuk W, Shimizu M. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase expression in inflammatory pseudotumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25:761–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Chun YS, Wang L, Nascimento AG, et al. Pediatric inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor: anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) expression and prognosis. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2005;45:796–801.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2018

Advertisement