These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Misdiagnosis of synovial sarcoma - cellular myofibroma with SRF-RELA gene fusion: A case report.
    Author: Zhou Y, Sun YW, Liu XY, Shen DH.
    Journal: World J Clin Cases; 2024 Mar 06; 12(7):1326-1332. PubMed ID: 38524524.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Cellular myofibroma is a rare subtype of myofibroma that was first described in 2017. Its diagnosis is often challenging because of its relative rarity, lack of known genetic abnormalities, and expression of muscle markers that can be confused with sarcomas that have myogenic differentiation. Currently, scholars have limited knowledge of this disease, and published cases are few. Further accumulation of diagnostic and treatment experiences is required. CASE SUMMARY: A 16-year-old girl experienced left upper limb swelling for 3 years. She sought medical attention at a local hospital 10 months ago, where magnetic resonance imaging revealed a 5-cm soft tissue mass. Needle biopsy performed at a local hospital resulted in the diagnosis of a spindle cell soft tissue sarcoma. The patient was referred to our hospital for limb salvage surgery with endoprosthetic replacement. She was initially diagnosed with a synovial sarcoma. Consequently, clinical management with chemotherapy was continued for the malignant sarcoma. Our pathology department also performed fluorescence in situ hybridization for result validation, which returned negative for SS18 gene breaks, indicating that it was not a synovial sarcoma. Next-generation sequencing was used to identify the SRF-RELA rearrangement. The final pathological diagnosis was a cellular/myofibroblastic neoplasm with an SRF-RELA gene fusion. The patient had initially received two courses of chemotherapy; however, chemotherapy was discontinued after the final diagnosis. CONCLUSION: This case was misdiagnosed because of its rare occurrence, benign biological behavior, and pathological similarity to soft tissue sarcoma.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]