共5页/97条首页上一页123下一页尾页
回复:100 阅读:17381
Sharing some photos of ovarian pure sertoli cell tumors

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
楼主 发表于 2009-07-23 01:24|举报|关注(17)
浏览排序[ 顺序 逆序 楼主 支持 精彩 ]  快捷回复
姓    名: ××× 性别:   年龄:  
标本名称:  
简要病史:  
肉眼检查:  

Notice we opened this section. Just paste a few photos from 5 ovarian tumors here. Enjoy.

Case 1

  • Sharing some photos of ovarian pure sertoli cell tumors图1
    图1
  • Sharing some photos of ovarian pure sertoli cell tumors图2
    图2
标签:
本帖最后由 于 2009-08-03 08:01:00 编辑
1
添加参考诊断
×参考诊断
  

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
1 楼    发表于2009-07-23 01:25:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-07-23 01:25:00 编辑  Case 2

名称:图1
描述:图1

名称:图2
描述:图2
0
回复

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
2 楼    发表于2009-07-23 01:26:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-07-23 01:26:00 编辑  Case 3

名称:图1
描述:图1

名称:图2
描述:图2
0
回复

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
3 楼    发表于2009-07-23 01:26:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-07-23 01:27:00 编辑  Case 4

名称:图1
描述:图1

名称:图2
描述:图2
0
回复

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
4 楼    发表于2009-07-23 01:27:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-07-23 01:28:00 编辑  case 5

名称:图1
描述:图1

名称:图2
描述:图2

名称:图3
描述:图3
0
回复

xhyong 离线

帖子:1060
粉蓝豆:519
经验:1993
注册时间:2006-10-19
加关注  |  发消息
5 楼    发表于2009-07-23 07:25:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 前面3个看上去都像支持细胞瘤,第一个也可能是支持细胞结节,第四个环小管性索瘤。第五个低分化粒层细胞瘤
0
回复

Dr_Lu 离线

帖子:111
粉蓝豆:1018
经验:139
注册时间:2007-12-06
加关注  |  发消息
6 楼    发表于2009-07-23 17:00:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 第3例鉴别诊断应除外类癌。
0
回复
signature
我的微博:眼镜加显微镜 访问地址:http://weibo.com/pathology

笃行者 离线

帖子:2689
粉蓝豆:59
经验:3020
注册时间:2006-10-04
加关注  |  发消息
7 楼    发表于2009-07-25 08:37:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复

 经典而少见的病例!谢谢Dr. zhao!

同意楼上两位老师的意见。

第一例考虑是单纯小管型的Sertoli细胞瘤;

第二、三例拿不准,很可能也是Sertoli细胞瘤的复杂小管型,但还要和诸如颗粒细胞瘤、类癌等鉴别一下;

第四例是环状小管性索肿瘤;

第五例考虑是颗粒细胞瘤。但最好要有免疫组化的结果支持。

不知正确与否,期待zhao老师的最后讲解。

1

尹儿
回复
signature
博学之,审问之,慎思之,明辨之,笃行之。

shandongzhang 离线

帖子:804
粉蓝豆:506
经验:1510
注册时间:2006-09-24
加关注  |  发消息
8 楼    发表于2009-07-25 18:20:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复

 真是一盘大餐,可惜不会看,只能猜猜了,也不怕献丑了:

case1:Sertoli细胞瘤

case2:类癌

case3:室管膜细胞瘤

case4:伴环状小管的性索肿瘤

case5:可能wolffian起源的肿瘤

0
回复

96298 离线

帖子:421
粉蓝豆:16
经验:423
注册时间:2009-03-08
加关注  |  发消息
9 楼    发表于2009-07-25 22:08:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 

case1:Sertoli细胞瘤

case2:类癌

case3:颗粒细胞瘤

case4:伴环状小管的性索肿瘤

case5:颗粒细胞瘤

0
回复

wangjw855 离线

帖子:1618
粉蓝豆:209
经验:2515
注册时间:2009-05-16
加关注  |  发消息
10 楼    发表于2009-07-25 23:02:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
以下是引用笃行者在2009-7-25 8:37:00的发言:

 经典而少见的病例!谢谢Dr. zhao!

同意楼上两位老师的意见。

第一例考虑是单纯小管型的Sertoli细胞瘤;

第二、三例拿不准,很可能也是Sertoli细胞瘤的复杂小管型,但还要和诸如颗粒细胞瘤、类癌等鉴别一下;

第四例是环状小管性索肿瘤;

第五例考虑是颗粒细胞瘤。但最好要有免疫组化的结果支持。

不知正确与否,期待zhao老师的最后讲解。

学习了,这样的病例集中学习最有意义!!支持笃行者老师的诊断。
0
回复

wfbjwt 离线

帖子:6628
粉蓝豆:163
经验:7418
注册时间:2006-10-08
加关注  |  发消息
11 楼    发表于2009-07-25 23:14:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-07-25 23:15:00 编辑

 1、支持细胞瘤;

2、颗粒细胞瘤;

3、类癌;

4、伴环状小管的性索肿瘤;

5、没感觉。

 

赵老师啥时给答案?期待

0
回复
signature
嫁人就嫁灰太狼,学习要上华夏网。

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
12 楼    发表于2009-07-26 09:18:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复

 For the last case, please observe the cytomorphology and architectures of the tumor more carefully. Did you notice some compacted tubular structures? Did you see granulosa tumors like this one before?

I can tell you that all these tumors are ov sex cord tumors. Just think a little more and give the reasonable guess. Frankly speaking rare people in the world have seen this growth pattern of the tumor. Now you are one of them.

0
回复

笃行者 离线

帖子:2689
粉蓝豆:59
经验:3020
注册时间:2006-10-04
加关注  |  发消息
13 楼    发表于2009-07-26 14:31:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-07-27 20:54:00 编辑  关于第五例,分化较差的颗粒细胞瘤似乎可以出现这种形态,但shandongzhang主任提到的可能wolffian起源的肿瘤也应该考虑。
0
回复
signature
博学之,审问之,慎思之,明辨之,笃行之。

强子 离线

帖子:950
粉蓝豆:535
经验:1218
注册时间:2007-10-28
加关注  |  发消息
14 楼    发表于2009-07-27 07:32:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-07-27 22:59:00 编辑  

 For the last case, please observe the cytomorphology and architectures of the tumor more carefully. Did you notice some compacted tubular structures? Did you see granulosa tumors like this one before?

I can tell you that all these tumors are ov sex cord tumors. Just think a little more and give the reasonable guess. Frankly speaking rare people in the world have seen this growth pattern of the tumor. Now you are one of them.


cqzhao老师回复:最后一例,注意仔细观察其细胞形态和肿瘤结构。看到那些比较紧密的管状结构了吗?以前看到过这样的粒层细胞瘤吗?

可以告诉大家的是,这几个病例都是卵巢的性索细胞肿瘤。仔细考虑一下,给出reasonable guess。老实说,看到具有这样的生长方式的这种肿瘤的人不多 (the fifth case)。现在你们就是其中之一……

0
回复
signature
赚点散碎银子养家,乐呵呵的穿衣吃饭

笃行者 离线

帖子:2689
粉蓝豆:59
经验:3020
注册时间:2006-10-04
加关注  |  发消息
15 楼    发表于2009-07-27 20:57:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 再次复习第五例,Sertoli细胞瘤也可以呈现这种形态。
0
回复
signature
博学之,审问之,慎思之,明辨之,笃行之。

shandongzhang 离线

帖子:804
粉蓝豆:506
经验:1510
注册时间:2006-09-24
加关注  |  发消息
16 楼    发表于2009-07-27 22:24:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复

“……可以告诉大家的是,这几个病例都是卵巢的性索细胞肿瘤。……”

5个病例5种结构或图像,可以有5肿独特的相应的肿瘤,但是5个病例都是卵巢性索细胞肿瘤的话,“Sertoli细胞瘤”完全可以解释上述不同分化程度的5种组织学结构,貌似有别,其实为同一肿瘤的不同分化。

0
回复

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
17 楼    发表于2009-07-27 23:22:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 Thank Dr.  笃行者 and Dr. Zhang' reasonal analysis. I will write down the results later. Now I need to sign out my cases with the fellows.
0
回复

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
18 楼    发表于2009-07-28 05:30:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 城北 于 2017-02-25 10:18:06 编辑

 All of them are pure sertoli cell tumors (SCT) from AFIP files I once used them for IHC study (about 20 stains for each cases).  I reviewed 150 cases of pure SCT and used 40 cases for IHC study at AFIP.

As some of you mentioned the case 4 may be called sex cord tumor with annular tubules (SCTAT). Some people may call SCT, complex tubular pattern (Tavassoli). Basically they are the same tumors called different tumors by different authours. People though SCTAT may be related with Peutz-Jeghers syndroma (P-Z-S). In fact Dr. Young paper indicated 11% (6/54)of SCT patients had PJS.

Case 5 is SCT with spindle cell growth pattern. You will appreciate the tubular structure if you see the photos carefully. 

Dr. Young paper: Among 54 SCT, The predominant microscopic pattern was tubular, seen, albeit often only focally, in all tumors; other patterns were cords or trabeculae (28), diffuse (21), pseudopapillary (4), retiform (3), islands or alveolar arrangements (3), and spindled (3). The tubules were solid or hollow with the former being somewhat more common.

Remeber that tubular structures are present in all SCT even though they can be very focal.

The largest and best paper about morphogolgic description and clinical followup results of SCT  is Dr Young's paper.

The largest and detailed IHC studies on SCT are my two papers. I paste these three papers in the following for some ones who may be interested.

0
收起回复
  • catcat:  再次学习,感触颇深!谢谢赵老师!
    2014-04-12 17:44

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
19 楼    发表于2009-07-28 05:31:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
本帖最后由 于 2009-07-28 05:37:00 编辑

 

Am J Surg Pathol. 2005 Feb;29(2):143-56.

Sertoli cell tumors of the ovary: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of 54 cases.

Oliva E, Alvarez T, Young RH.

James Wright Pathology Laboratories, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02114, USA. eoliva@partners.org

 

Ovarian Sertoli cell tumors are rare, and their morphologic spectrum, behavior, and factors influencing the latter are not clearly established. They may be mimicked by many different tumors, some of them more frequent than Sertoli cell tumors; immunohistochemistry may aid in this differential, but its role has not been analyzed in a large series. We studied the clinicopathologic features of 54 Sertoli cell tumors, including the immunohistochemical profile of 23 of them. The patients, 6 of whom had Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, ranged from 2 to 76 years of age (mean, 30 years). Eleven patients had estrogenic and 4 had androgenic manifestations. The tumors ranged from 0.8 to 30 cm, with the majority being in the range of 4 to 12 cm. They were all unilateral, usually solid, and often yellow. The predominant microscopic pattern was tubular, seen, albeit often only focally, in all tumors; other patterns were cords or trabeculae (28), diffuse (21), pseudopapillary (4), retiform (3), islands or alveolar arrangements (3), and spindled (3). The tubules were solid or hollow with the former being somewhat more common. Delicate septa were occasionally seen and were conspicuous in areas of one tumor. The stroma was abundant in 15 tumors with marked sclerosis in 4. The cells usually had pale to occasionally densely eosinophilic cytoplasm, but 6 tumors were composed of cells with prominent foamy cytoplasm, falling in the category of "lipid-rich" Sertoli cell tumor, and one had cells with clear non-foamy cytoplasm. Forty-four tumors were stage I (42 of them were stage Ia and 2 were stage Ic), 1 was stage II, 3 were stage III, and 6 were not adequately staged. Follow-up was available for 27 patients with stage I tumors, and all were alive and well at last follow-up except for 2 patients with stage Ia and 1 with stage Ic disease. Those 3 patients had pelvic-abdominal recurrences 18, 36, and 9 months, respectively, after the initial diagnosis. Two of the three clinically malignant stage I tumors had moderate to severe cytologic atypia and brisk mitotic activity (>5 or more mitoses/10 high power fields [HPFs]), and one of these had tumor cell necrosis. Among the 10 clinically benign stage I tumors with more than 5 years of follow-up, only 3 had >5 mitoses/10 HPFs, but none had more than mild cytologic atypia and none had tumor cell necrosis. Two of the three patients with stage III disease had follow-up information and one was alive at 16 months and the second developed splenic metastases 2 years after the initial diagnosis. Two of the three stage III tumors had at least moderate cytologic atypia and brisk mitotic activity. Immunohistochemical stains showed positivity for AE1/3-Cam5.2 in 15 of 23 tumors; Epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) was negative in all the tumors. Inhibin was positive in 18 of 22 tumors, calretinin in 10 of 20, CD99 in 19 of 22, vimentin in 17 of 18, smooth muscle actin in 4 of 18, neuron specific enolase in 8 of 16, S-100 in 2 of 20, and chromogranin was negative in all 21 cases studied. Although Sertoli cell tumors usually have a distinctive tubular pattern that facilitates the diagnosis, other patterns may occasionally predominate, causing confusion with various other primary and metastatic ovarian tumors. EMA, inhibin, and chromogranin represent the most helpful triad of immunomarkers serving to exclude two common mimics of Sertoli cell tumors (endometrioid carcinoma [inhibin-; EMA+; chromogranin-] and carcinoid tumor [inhibin-; EMA+; chromogranin+]). Although CD99 and calretinin are often expressed in these tumors, they are much less specific and not as helpful in the differential diagnosis. Most Sertoli cell tumors are stage I, unilateral, cytologically bland, and clinically benign, but occasional examples are high stage, and about 11% of stage I tumors have worrisome histologic features that may portend an adverse outcome. The tumors typically occur in young females, sometimes children who typically present with sexual precocity, and occasional patients have Peutz-Jeghers syndrome.

 
0
回复

cqzhao 离线

帖子:5518
粉蓝豆:1071
经验:5755
注册时间:2008-09-29
加关注  |  发消息
20 楼    发表于2009-07-28 05:32:00举报|引用
返回顶部 | 快捷回复
 Am J Surg Pathol. 2007 Feb;31(2):255-66.

Comparative analysis of alternative and traditional immunohistochemical markers for the distinction of ovarian sertoli cell tumor from endometrioid tumors and carcinoid tumor: A study of 160 cases.

Department of Gynecologic and Breast Pathology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, DC, USA. chengquanzhao@yahoo.com

The main neoplasms in the differential diagnosis for primary ovarian tumors with a tubule-rich pattern are pure Sertoli cell tumor, endometrioid tumors (including borderline tumor, well-differentiated carcinoma, and the sertoliform variant of endometrioid carcinoma), and carcinoid tumor. Because traditional immunohistochemical markers [pan-cytokeratin (pan-CK), low molecular weight cytokeratin (CK8/18), epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), inhibin, calretinin, CD99, chromogranin, and synaptophysin] can occasionally have diagnostic limitations, the goal of this study was to determine whether or not any alternative markers [cytokeratin 7 (CK7), estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), CD10, and CD56] have better diagnostic utility when compared with traditional markers for this differential diagnosis. Immunohistochemical stains for alternative, as well as traditional, markers were performed on the following primary ovarian tumors: pure Sertoli cell tumor (n = 40), endometrioid borderline tumor (n = 38), sertoliform endometrioid carcinoma (n = 13), well-differentiated endometrioid carcinoma (n = 27), and carcinoid tumor (n = 42). Extent and intensity of immunostaining were semiquantitatively scored. In addition, immunohistochemical composite scores (ICSs) in positive cases were calculated on the basis of the combination of extent and intensity scores. Cytokeratin 7 (CK7) was positive in 97% of endometrioid tumors, 13% of Sertoli cell tumors, and 24% of carcinoid tumors. The differences in the mean ICSs for endometrioid tumors versus Sertoli cell tumor or carcinoid tumor were statistically significant (P values ranging from <0.001 to 0.018). ER and PR were positive in 87% and 86% of endometrioid tumors, 8% and 13% of Sertoli cell tumors, and 2% each of carcinoid tumors, respectively. The differences in the mean ICSs for endometrioid tumors versus Sertoli cell tumor were statistically significant (P values ranging from <0.001 to 0.012). Among the epithelial markers, EMA seemed to be the most discriminatory but only slightly better than CK7, ER, or PR. Pan-CK and CK8/18 were not helpful. CD10 showed overlapping patterns of expression in all categories of tumors. Among the sex cord markers, CD10 was markedly less useful than inhibin or calretinin; CD99 was not discriminatory. CD56 showed overlapping patterns of expression in all categories of tumors. Among the neuroendocrine markers, CD56 was less useful than chromogranin or synaptophysin. When traditional immunohistochemical markers are problematic for the differential diagnosis of ovarian Sertoli cell tumor versus endometrioid tumors versus carcinoid tumor, adding CK7, ER, and/or PR to a panel of markers can be helpful. Endometrioid tumors more frequently express CK7, ER, and PR and show a greater extent of immunostaining in contrast to Sertoli cell tumor and carcinoid tumor. Compared with traditional epithelial markers, CK7, ER, and PR are nearly as advantageous as EMA. Inhibin is the most discriminatory sex cord marker, and CD10 is not helpful in the differential diagnosis. Chromogranin and synaptophysin are excellent discriminatory markers for carcinoid tumor, and CD56 is neither sufficiently sensitive nor specific enough for this differential diagnosis to warrant its use in routine practice.

2

xyxu

步子行空..
回复
回复:100 阅读:17381
共5页/97条首页上一页123下一页尾页
【免责声明】讨论内容仅作学术交流之用,不作为诊疗依据,由此而引起的法律问题作者及本站不承担任何责任。
快速回复
进入高级回复
您最多可输入10000个汉字,按 "Ctrl" + "Enter" 直接发送
搜索回复/乘电梯 ×
按内容
按会员
乘电梯
合作伙伴
友情链接