Skip to main content
Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica logoLink to Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
. 2023 Sep 14;103(4):740–750. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14672

Imaging features, clinical characteristics and neonatal outcomes of pregnancy luteoma: A case series and literature review

Jian‐Hong Shang 1, Cai‐Xin Huang 1, Qiao Zheng 1, Jie‐Ling Feng 1, Ke He 2, Hong‐Ning Xie 1,
PMCID: PMC10993364  PMID: 37710408

Abstract

Introduction

This study aimed to investigate the imaging features, clinical characteristics and neonatal outcomes of pregnancy luteoma.

Material and methods

We retrospectively analyzed patients with pregnancy luteoma admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‐sen University between January 2003 and December 2022. We recorded their imaging features, clinical characteristics and neonatal outcomes. Additionally, we reviewed relevant studies in the field.

Results

In total, 127 cases were identified, including eight from our hospital and 119 from the literature. Most patients (93/127, 73.23%) were of reproductive age, 20–40 years old, and 66% were parous. Maternal hirsutism or virilization (such as deepening voice, acne, facial hair growth and clitoromegaly) was observed in 29.92% (38/127), whereas 59.06% of patients (75/127) were asymptomatic. Abdominal pain was reported in 13 patients due to compression, torsion or combined ectopic pregnancy. The pregnancy luteomas, primarily discovered during the third trimester (79/106, 74.53%), varied in size ranging from 10 mm to 20 cm in diameter. Seventy‐five cases were incidentally detected during cesarean section or postpartum tubal ligation, and 39 were identified through imaging or physical examination during pregnancy. Approximately 26.61% of patients had bilateral lesions. The majority of pregnancy luteomas were solid and well‐defined (94/107, 87.85%), with 43.06% (31/72) displaying multiple solid and well‐circumscribed nodules. Elevated serum androgen levels (reaching values between 1.24 and 1529 times greater than normal values for term gestation) were observed in patients with hirsutism or virilization, with a larger lesion diameter (P < 0.001) and a higher prevalence of bilateral lesions (P < 0.001). Among the female infants born to masculinized mothers, 68.18% (15/22) were virilized. Information of imaging features was complete in 22 cases. Ultrasonography revealed well‐demarcated hypoechoic solid masses with rich blood supply in 12 of 19 cases (63.16%). Nine patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT), and six exhibited solid masses, including three with multi‐nodular solid masses.

Conclusions

Pregnancy luteomas mainly manifest as well‐defined, hypoechoic and hypervascular solid masses. MRI and CT are superior to ultrasonography in displaying the imaging features of multiple nodules. Maternal masculinization and solid masses with multiple nodules on imaging may help diagnose this rare disease.

Keywords: imaging findings, masculinization, multi‐nodular sign, pregnancy luteoma, tumor‐like ovarian lesion


Distinguishing pregnancy luteoma from malignant ovarian tumors may be challenging. However, features such as maternal masculinization and the presence of solid masses with multiple nodules on imaging may provide valuable diagnostic clues.

graphic file with name AOGS-103-740-g001.jpg


Abbreviations

ADNEX

assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa

AFP

alpha‐fetoprotein

CA‐125

carcinoma antigen‐125

CT

computed tomography

MRI

magnetic resonance imaging

O‐RADS

ovarian‐adnexal reporting and data system

PL

pregnancy luteoma

SR

Simple Rules

SR‐Risk

Simple Rules Risk

1. INTRODUCTION

Pregnancy luteoma (PL) is a rare tumor‐like lesion of the ovary that occurs during pregnancy and regresses spontaneously after delivery, with or without virilization in pregnant women and fetuses. Fewer than 200 cases have been reported in the literature. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 Previous studies have indicated that distinguishing PL from other types of ovarian tumors, such as malignancies, may be difficult, especially when accompanied by massive ascites and an elevated CA125 level. 26 , 27 , 28 Hence, a good appreciation of the clinical and imaging features of PL can avoid unnecessary exploratory laparotomies or termination of pregnancy. Current evidence on sonographic appearance is predominantly limited to case reports. 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 Herein, we summarize the clinical characteristics and neonatal outcomes of patients with PLs to improve our understanding of the natural history of the disease and help clinicians manage patients. We also conducted a literature review and explored the existing literature on the imaging findings associated with this condition.

2. MATERIAL AND METHODS

2.1. Study scheme

The clinical data of eight patients with PLs who were admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‐sen University between January 2003 and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. During this period, 64 580 gravidas were admitted to our hospital for delivery. All pregnant women underwent routine obstetric examinations and ultrasound screening (including observation of bilateral adnexa) during the first, second and third trimesters. All cases of PL were confirmed by pathologic examination. Table 1 summarizes the clinical characteristics and neonatal outcomes of the patients.

TABLE 1.

Cases with pregnancy luteoma in the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‐sen University.

Case No. Age, years Clinical manifestations Maternal or female fetal masculinization Mode of delivery Cesarean indications Newborns gender/weight (kg) Time and method of lesion detection Location of the lesions Lesion size (mm) Tumor characteristic Tumor color score Ascites Cut surface
1 30 Abdominal pain Yes Vaginal delivery / Female/2.27

36+1 weeks

sonography

Bilateral 92; 97 Solid Abundant Yes Brownish‐yellow, soft
2 27 Proteinuria, edema No Cesarean section Adnexal mass Female/2.90

37+1 weeks

sonography

Right 60 Solid Moderate No Grayish‐yellow, soft
3 20 Abdominal pain, vaginal bleeding No Cesarean section Ectopic pregnancy /

5+3 weeks

sonography

Left 73

Unilocular

(Anechoic)

Minimal No Smooth inner and outer walls; clear yellow cyst fluid
4 25 Asymptomatic No Cesarean section Complete placenta previa Female/3.32 12+4 weeks sonography Left 71

Unilocular

(Ground glass)

Minimal No Smooth outer walls, chocolate‐like liquid, and many small papillary projections could be seen inside.
5 37 Asymptomatic No Cesarean section Scarred uterus Male/3.45

38+5 weeks

cesarean section

Right 10 Solid / No Medium texture; information about the cut surface of the mass was unknown
6 29 Asymptomatic No Cesarean section

Cephalopelvic

disproportion

Female/3.65

40 weeks

cesarean section

Right 40 Solid / No Brownish‐yellow, soft
7 26 Asymptomatic No Cesarean section Fetal distress Male/3.30

38+6 weeks

cesarean section

Left 15 Solid / No Brownish‐yellow, soft
8 29 Asymptomatic No Cesarean section Fetal distress Female/3.05

38+6 weeks

cesarean section

Left 25 Solid / No Hard texture; information about the cut surface of the mass was unknown

All original ultrasound images and video clips of cases 1–4 were collected at a central reading site, where they were independently reviewed by another experienced ultrasound examiner who was blinded to the medical information and pathological results of patients. The reviewer independently categorized the ultrasound images of each mass according to the ovarian‐adnexal reporting and data system (O‐RADS) published by the American College of Radiology (ACR), 43 IOTA Simple Rules (SR), Simple Rules Risk (SR‐Risk) assessment, and assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa (ADNEX) model without CA125. We calculated the risk of malignancy using the IOTA SR‐Risk and ADNEX online algorithms (http://www.iotagroup.org; Table S1).

A literature search of the PubMed, Web of Science and Embase databases was conducted, using the Medical Subject Headings terms “pregnancy luteoma” and “luteoma of pregnancy”. Only the articles published in English between January 1965 and December 2022 were included. To determine study inclusion, two authors screened all titles and abstracts, and reviewed relevant articles. Disagreements were resolved either by consensus or by consultation with a third reviewer. Data on clinical characteristics, imaging features and neonatal outcomes were extracted from our hospital and published case reports.

2.2. Statistical analyses

The chi‐square test was used to analyze the relationship between maternal virilization and clinicopathologic characteristics. The clinical and sonographic parameters of the PLs were summarized using absolute frequencies (%) as categorical variables and medians (ranges) as continuous variables. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS (version 22.0; SPSS). A two‐sided value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

2.3. Ethics statement

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat‐sen University on March 21, 2023 (Approval Number: [2022]064).

3. RESULTS

3.1. Case series

A total of eight patients were enrolled. The median age of patients was 28 (range 20–37) years. Four patients were primiparous. Two patients had gestational diabetes mellitus and maintained reasonable glycemic control without pharmacological intervention. Symptoms that led to the discovery of the masses included abdominal pain in two patients (one after ectopic pregnancy and associated with abnormal vaginal bleeding), proteinuria/edema in one preeclampsia patient, and incidental findings in five others. Case 1 is the only patient who complained of masculine changes (clitoral hypertrophy at 24 weeks of gestation). Unfortunately, hormonal testing was not performed on any patient. Only the preoperative serum levels of alpha‐fetoprotein (AFP) and carcinoma antigen (CA)‐125 were recorded, significantly elevated in Case 1 (AFP, 235.09 μg/L; CA‐1252356.8 U/mL).

Adnexal masses were detected on sonography in four cases. Cases 1 and 2 were detected during the third trimester, and ultrasonography showed adnexal heterogeneous hypoechoic solid masses with clear boundaries and abundant (Figure 1A,B) or moderate (Figure 2A,B) color Doppler signals, both of which were misdiagnosed as ovarian tumors. Contrast‐enhanced computed tomography (CT) showed a solid mass with multiple nodules (Figure 1C), and massive hydrothorax and ascites were detected in Case 1. Cases 3 and 4 were detected during early pregnancy and ultrasonography revealed a unilocular cystic mass with a color score of 1 or 2 (Figure 2C,D). The cyst content was anechoic in one case and ground‐glass opacity (because of hemorrhage) in the other. We calculated the risk of malignancy in PL (Cases 1–4) using four ultrasound‐based diagnostic models, of which approximately half were diagnosed with malignant tumors, especially those with solid masses (Table S1).

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

A 30‐year‐old woman presented with pregnancy luteoma at 36+1 weeks of gestation (Case 1). (A) Abdominal transverse images show a 97 × 75 mm heterogeneous hypoechoic solid mass with clear boundaries (right side). (B) Color Doppler image demonstrated prominent vascularity within the mass. (C) Contrast‐enhanced CT showed a solid mass with multiple nodules and massive ascites. (D) The nodular appearance of the enlarged ovary. (E) The cut surface showed multiple brownish‐yellow solid nodules with a soft texture. (F) External genitalia of the female infant 23 months after delivery. CT, computed tomography.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

The gray‐scale and Doppler ultrasound images of pregnancy luteoma. (A,B) Transabdominal image identified a well‐circumscribed 60 × 55 mm heterogeneous hypoechoic solid mass with moderate signal intensity on color Doppler (Case 2). Ultrasonography showed a unilocular cystic mass (Cases 3 and 4). Cyst content was anechoic with a color score of 2 in one case (C), and ground glass opacity (because of hemorrhage) with a color score of 1 in the other (D).

All the patients underwent surgery: seven patients underwent lesion resection, and Case 1 underwent exploratory laparotomy and intraoperative frozen biopsy of bilateral ovaries. The maximum diameters of the masses were significantly different, ranging from 10 mm to 97 mm. Overall, seven cases were unilateral, and one had bilateral ovarian involvement. Six patients presented with solid masses with clear borders. Moreover, in these cases, the cut surface showed single or multiple brownish‐yellow/reddish‐brown solid nodules (Figure 1D,E), four of which had a soft texture. The remaining two cases were uncommon with regard to the apparent cystic appearance of the lesion.

The gestational age at delivery was 37–40 weeks. The seven newborns included five girls (5/7, 71.4%) and two boys (2/7, 28.6%). The Apgar scores were to 10–10 after 1–5 minutes. The newborns weighed between 2.27 and 3.65 kg. Physical examinations of the four female neonates were normal, and virilization was detected in one girl (clitoral hypertrophy in Case 1). We conducted the telephone follow‐up in December 2022, and all mothers recovered normal menstruation 1–4 months after stopping breastfeeding or undergoing surgical treatment for ectopic pregnancy. However, whether the surgery impairs ovarian function has not yet been explicitly evaluated. In Case 1, the serum levels of tumor markers (CA125 and AFP) gradually decreased to normal 1 month after delivery. Two months postpartum, ultrasonography revealed normalized bilateral ovaries. However, the clitoris was still enlarged at 23 months postpartum in both mother and daughter (Figure 1F).

3.2. Literature review

A total of 46 articles were retrieved from the literature, which reported 119 PL cases. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 44 , 45 In comparison, 19 articles were excluded for the following reasons: (1) did not have an English version (n = 7); (2) the full text was not available (n = 11); and (3) duplicates were removed (n = 1). Therefore, 127 cases (including eight cases from our hospital) of PLs were identified and summarized (Figure 3; Table 2).

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Flow chart summarizing inclusion in the systematic review of studies on pregnancy luteomas. CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; PL, pregnancy luteoma.

TABLE 2.

Clinicopathologic characteristics and neonatal outcomes of pregnancy luteomas.

Variable n %
Age at diagnosis, (years)
≦20 10 7.87
>20 and ≤30 49 38.58
>30 and ≤40 44 34.65
>40 and ≤50 1 0.79
Unknown 23 18.11
Reproductive history
Primigravida 34 26.77
Multipara 66 51.97
Unknown 27 21.26
Clinical manifestations
Asymptomatic 75 59.06
Maternal hirsutism or virilization 38 29.92
Abdominal pain 13 10.24
Other 7 5.51
Maternal hirsutism or virilization
Yes 38 29.92
No 83 65.36
Unknown 6 4.72
Newborn gender
Early abortion 2 1.56
Ectopic pregnancy 3 2.34
Male 29 22.66
Female 51 a 39.84
Unknown 43 33.60
Female fetal virilization
Yes 19 37.25
No 32 62.75
Time of discovery mass
First trimester 8 6.30
Second trimester 9 7.09
Third trimester 79 62.20
After delivery 10 7.87
Unknown 21 16.54
Method of discovery mass
Imaging or physical examination 39 30.71
Incidental finding 75 59.06
Unknown 13 10.23
Tumor size (mm)
≤50 40 31.50
>50 and ≤100 38 29.92
>100 and ≤150 12 9.44
>150 1 0.79
Unknown 36 28.35
Location of the mass
Unilateral 80 62.99
Bilateral 29 22.84
Unknown 18 14.17
Mass complexity
Solid mass 94 74.02
Complex mass 6 4.72
Cystic mass 7 5.51
Unknown 20 15.75
Solid mass with multiple nodules
Yes 31 32.98
No 41 43.62
Unknown 22 23.40
Multilocular cystic mass
Yes 4 57.14
No 3 42.86
a

One case was a dichorionic diamniotic twin pregnancy.

3.2.1. Clinical characteristics

The age at diagnosis mostly ranged between 20 and 40 years (93/127, 73.23%). Two‐thirds of patients (66/100, 66%) were parous. Most patients (75/127, 59.06%) were asymptomatic. In 29.92% (38/127) of cases, luteomas were hormonally active, with the secretion of androgens, which can result in maternal hirsutism and virilization (such as deepening voice, acne, facial hair growth and clitoromegaly). In 13 cases, PLs caused abdominal pain due to symptoms associated with compression, torsions or combined ectopic pregnancy. Among the 127 patients, four had hydrothorax and/or ascites, and three had elevated serum CA125 levels. The PLs, primarily discovered during the third trimester (79/106, 74.53%), varied in size from 10 mm to 20 cm in diameter. Seventy‐five cases were incidentally detected during cesarean section or postpartum tubal ligation, and 39 were found on imaging or physical examination during pregnancy. Approximately one‐quarter of the patients (29/109, 26.61%) had bilateral lesions. The PLs were mainly solid and well‐defined (94/107, 87.85%), and 43.06% (31/72) showed multiple solid and well‐circumscribed nodules.

Serum levels of testosterone and other androgens are often markedly elevated (reaching values between 1.24 and 1529 times greater than normal values for term gestation) in patients with hirsutism and virilization. Virilization of the female fetus was found in 68.18% of patients (15/22) with maternal hirsutism, which resulted in clitoral enlargement and ambiguous genitalia (Table S2). Table 3 presents the correlation between maternal virilization and the clinicopathologic features of PLs. Compared with the non‐maternally masculinized group, patients with maternal masculinization had a larger maximum lesion diameter (P < 0.001) and a higher prevalence of bilateral lesions (P < 0.001). However, the two groups showed no significant differences in age at diagnosis, reproductive history, time of mass discovery or mass complexity.

TABLE 3.

Correlation between maternal virilization and clinicopathologic features of pregnancy luteoma.

Variable Maternal virilization P‐value
No (n) Yes (n)
Age at diagnosis, (years)
≤30 28 18 0.361
>30 28 11
Reproductive history
Primigravida 17 14 0.087
Multipara 36 12
Time of discovery mass
First and second trimesters 11 6 1.000
Third trimester and after delivery 31 20
Method of discovery mass
Imaging or physical examination 12 17 0.005
Accidental discovery 30 9
Tumor size (mm)
≤50 31 3 a <0.001
>50 23 24
Location of the mass
Unilateral 50 14 <0.001
Bilateral 6 16
Mass complexity
Solid 47 21 0.207
Other types 6 6
a

Fisher's exact test.

3.2.2. Imaging features

Information of imaging features was complete in 22 cases of PLs (Table 4). Ultrasonography revealed bilateral or unilateral well‐demarcated hypoechoic solid masses with rich blood supply in 12 cases (12/19, 63.16%), complex masses in four cases, and cystic masses in three cases. Nine patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) examination, and six had solid masses, including three patients with multinodular solid masses. The other two cases had multiple cystic masses.

TABLE 4.

Review of the literature on imaging findings of pregnancy luteoma.

First author [ref.], year Number of cases Maternal or female fetal masculinization Location of the lesions Lesion size (mm) Time of finding mass Sonographic findings Color score CT or MRI findings

Rodriguez [29], 1999

1 1 Right 125 Postpartum

Complex right adnexal mass with focal areas of increased chogenicity.

Ascites and a small right pleural effusion

Increased venous vascularity Unknown

Choi [30], 2000

Case 1 Yes Right 57 28 weeks Heterogeneous solid mass Increased vascularity Unknown

Choi [30], 2000

Case‐2 No Left 55 21 weeks Complex mass Color score 4 Unknown

Warmann [31], 2000

1 Yes Bilateral Unknown Postpartum Enlargement of both ovaries with cystic alterations Unknown Unknown

Mazza [32], 2002

1 Yes Bilateral 80; 80 5 weeks An enlarged ovary containing small hypoechoic and hyperechoic areas Unknown Unknown

Wang [33], 2003

1 No Bilateral 120; 100 27 weeks Unknown Unknown Multilocular cystic masses with thickened internal septa

Kao [34], 2005

1 Yes Bilateral 80; 74 35 weeks Heterogeneous echogenicity mass Hypervascularity

Multinodular mass;

T1‐weighted images: high signal intensity;

T2‐weighted images: low signal intensity

Wang [35], 2005

1 Yes Bilateral 90; 70 Unknown Unknown Unknown Solid ovarian mass with multiple nodules

Spitzer [36], 2007

1 Yes Right 86 6.5 weeks Apparent fibroid Unknown A heterogeneous, predominantly solid mass

Tannus [27], 2009

1 No Right 83 22 weeks

Hypoechoic predominantly solid mass

Color score 4;

low‐resistance arterial flow

T1‐weighted images: heterogeneous low signal intensity;

T2‐weighted images: predominantly high signal intensity

Masarie [37], 2010

1 Yes Right 115 33 weeks

Solid ovarian mass

Unknown Solid adnexal mass without associated hemorrhage or ascites

Dasari [38], 2013

1 Yes Bilateral 60; 100 8 weeks Enlarged and homogeneously isoechoic to hypoechoic ovaries; moderate ascites Unknown Unknown

Wadzinski [39], 2014

1 Yes Bilateral 58; 58 15 days after birth Unknown Unknown Each ovary contains numerous small follicles (2–3 mm) and no dominant ovarian mass or cyst

Wang [26], 2015

1 No Right 60 15 weeks Solid tumor; massive ascites Color score 4 Unknown

Rapisarda [40], 2016

1 Yes Right 120 28 weeks Adnexal mass with necrotic areas Color score 2 Unknown

Khurana [41], 2017

1 No Left 81 19 weeks Heterogenous solid component and a 4‐cm cystic component Internal vascularity and arterial blood flow Heterogenous mass with both cystic and soft tissue components

Brar [42], 2017

1 No Right 20 8 weeks Predominantly solid right ovarian mass containing multiple small cystic areas and a small solid focus Unknown Unknown

Dayal [28], 2022

1 No Right 30 First trimester Adnexal solid mass Color score 4 Unknown
Shang, this study, 2023 Case 1 Yes Bilateral 97; 97 36+1 weeks Adnexal heterogeneous hypoechoic solid masses with clear boundaries Color score 4 Solid mass with multiple nodules; massive hydrothorax and ascites
Shang, this study, 2023 Case‐2 No Right 60 37+1 weeks Heterogeneous hypoechoic solid masses with clear boundaries Color score 3 Unknown
Shang, this study, 2023 Case‐3 No Left 73 5+3 weeks

Unilocular cystic mass;

cyst content was anechoic

Color score 2 Unknown
Shang, this study, 2023 Case‐4 No Left 71 12+4 weeks

Unilocular cystic mass;

cyst content was ground glass

Color score 1 Unknown

Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.

3.2.3. Follow‐up

Serum testosterone levels decreased rapidly after delivery and returned to normal within 2 weeks postpartum. Maternal and infant virilizing signs (hirsutism and acne) had regressed 6 months postpartum, except for the patient's deepened voice and clitoromegaly. PLs typically undergo spontaneous postpartum regression, usually within 3 months of delivery.

4. DISCUSSION

The clinical and imaging characteristics of 127 patients with PL (including eight cases from our hospital and 119 published case reports in the literature) were retrospectively analyzed. The incidence of PLs in our hospital was 8/64 580. However, the actual incidence of PLs has not been fully elucidated. The clinical characteristics of our patients were generally similar to those reported in the literature. 2 , 20 They were usually asymptomatic and were incidentally detected during cesarean section or postpartum tubal ligation. PLs varied in size, and three‐quarters of the lesions were discovered in the late stages of pregnancy. Most PLs were solid lesions with clear borders, and 43.06% appeared as multiple, solid well‐circumscribed nodules. According to a 1993 literature report, 12 one‐third of patients with PLs had bilateral masses. Subsequently, several studies have reported that PLs almost always occurred unilaterally. 23 , 25 Our review found that lesions were bilateral in one‐quarter of the cases.

Thirty percent of the lesions were hormonally active, resulting in maternal or fetal hirsutism and virilization. Sixty‐eight percent of female infants born to masculinized mothers were also virilized, consistent with the literature. 2 , 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 20 , 25 Serum levels of testosterone and other androgens were often markedly elevated (reaching values between 1.24 and 1529 times greater than normal values for term gestation) in patients with hirsutism and virilization. 12 During a normal pregnancy, the maternal circulating testosterone may rise up to seven times the non‐pregnant levels, which does not cause virilization. Tissue analysis of PLs revealed similar quantities of androgen hormones in cases with and without hirsutism. 3 Generally, masculine changes occur in cases with a larger maximum diameter of bilateral lesions which can increase serum testosterone levels. Therefore, we speculated that masculinization may be related to lesion size and bilateral lesions. Maternal masculinization may be a valuable clinical sign to aid in diagnosis, although it can also be caused by sex cord tumors such as Sertoli–Leydig cell tumors.

Most PL masses are solid with clear borders, brownish‐yellow or reddish‐brown cut surfaces, and a soft texture. 12 PL must be distinguished from other solid ovarian neoplasms, such as granulosa cell tumors, steroid cell tumors, germ cell tumors, Krukenberg tumors and Sertoli–Leydig cell tumors, to avoid oophorectomy in pregnant women, especially when accompanied by massive ascites and an elevated CA125 levels. 26 , 27 , 28 , 46 , 47 The gross morphology and histopathologic features of PL can provide clues for a differential diagnosis. PLs originate from luteinized cells in a “follicle‐like” structure, particularly theca‐lutein cells. The proliferation of the theca‐lutein cells can obliterate the follicular cavity and form solid nodules. 12 , 25 To date, the imaging features of 22 cases (including four cases from our hospital) have been reported in the literature. 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 The ultrasound findings were mostly bilateral or unilateral hypoechoic solid masses with clear borders and rich blood supply (63.16%), 26 , 27 , 28 , 30 , 34 which correlated well with the imaging findings in Cases 1 and 2 in our hospital. Recently, the ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE demonstrated that the IOTA ADNEX and SR‐Risk models were the best ultrasound‐based diagnostic models for the characterization of ovarian masses. 48 However, these models revealed some difficulties in differentiating PLs from solid masses using the suggested thresholds in our study.

MRI and CT showed that approximately half of the solid lesions had multiple nodules. MRI and CT are superior to ultrasonography in displaying the imaging features of multiple nodules. In addition, some PL lesions can have multilocular cystic masses with thickened internal septa or a complex cystic appearance due to regions of hemorrhage. 29 , 30 , 33 , 39 , 40 Interestingly, ultrasonography demonstrated unilocular cystic masses with well‐defined margins in our Cases 3 and 4. Based on the current described cases, PLs cannot be differentiated from other ovarian tumors using ultrasonography. Once PL is suspected, the patient should undergo detailed MRI to visualize the multiple nodules of the lesions, and hormonal assays for testosterone and its derivatives.

The main strengths of our study are that it is the first to summarize imaging features of PLs and compare the clinicopathologic features of PLs between patients with and without maternal masculinization in the same cohort. Our study has several limitations. First, the ultrasound information was retrospectively extracted from ultrasound reports and images, and therefore our conclusions on ultrasound features of PLs may be biased and should be interpreted with caution. Secondly, complete information on serum levels of testosterone and other androgens was only available in some cases.

5. CONCLUSION

PLs primarily manifested as bilateral or unilateral, well‐defined, hypoechoic and hypervascular solid masses. MRI and CT are superior to ultrasonography in displaying the imaging features of multiple nodules. Maternal masculinization and the presence of solid masses with multiple nodules on imaging may help in the diagnosis of this rare disease.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

JS and HX conceived and designed the study; JS and QZ screened and selected the articles. JS, CH, JF and KH analyzed the data. JS drafted the manuscript. QZ and HX revised the paper for important content. All authors read and approved the paper.

FUNDING INFORMATION

This study was supported by research grants from the National Scientific Foundation Committee of China (82171938, 81801705 and 82202156).

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors have stated explicitly that there are no conflicts of interest in connection with this article.

Supporting information

Table S1

AOGS-103-740-s001.docx (13.6KB, docx)

Table S2

AOGS-103-740-s002.docx (47.7KB, docx)

Shang J‐H, Huang C‐X, Zheng Q, Feng J‐L, He K, Xie H‐N. Imaging features, clinical characteristics and neonatal outcomes of pregnancy luteoma: A case series and literature review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2024;103:740‐750. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14672

Jian‐Hong Shang and Cai‐Xin Huang are joint first authors of this article.

REFERENCES

  • 1. Sternberg WH, Barclay DL. Luteoma of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1966;95:165‐184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Norris HJ, Taylor HB. Nodular theca‐lutein hyperplasia of pregnancy (so‐called "pregnancy luteoma"). A clinical and pathologic study of 15 cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 1967;47:557‐566. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Mandell GH, Floyd WS, Cohn SL, Goodman PA. Luteoma of pregnancy. A pseudotumor. Am J Clin Pathol. 1967;47:148‐153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Jenkins ME, Surana RB, Russell‐Cutts CM. Ambiguous genitals in a female infant associated with luteoma of pregnancy. Report of a case. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1968;101:923‐928. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Dische FE, Ritchie JM. Luteoma of pregnancy. J Pathol. 1970;100:77‐78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Wolff E, Glasser M, Gordon GG, Olivo J, Southren AL. Virilizing luteoma of pregnancy. Report of a case with measurements of testosterone and testosterone binding in plasma. Am J Med. 1973;54:229‐233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Tucker S, Buell J, Fisher HR. Luteoma of pregnancy: case report. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1975;121:282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Garcia‐Bunuel R, Brandes D. Luteoma of pregnancy: ultrastructural features. Hum Pathol. 1976;7:205‐214. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Verkauf BS, Reiter EO, Hernandez L, Burns SA. Virilization of mother and fetus associated with luteoma of pregnancy: a case report with endocrinologic studies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1977;129:274‐280. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Yasuda J, Shiroshita K, Yamamoto T, Okada H. Virilizing pregnancy luteoma: a case report. Asia Oceania J Obstet Gynaecol. 1988;14:155‐160. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Illingworth PJ, Johnstone FD, Steel J, Seth J. Luteoma of pregnancy: masculinisation of a female fetus prevented by placental aromatisation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992;99:1019‐1020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Clement PB. Tumor‐like lesions of the ovary associated with pregnancy. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1993;12:108‐115. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Piana S, Nogales FF, Corrado S, Cardinale L, Gusolfino D, Rivasi F. Pregnancy luteoma with granulosa cell proliferation: an unusual hyperplastic lesion arising in pregnancy and mimicking an ovarian neoplasia. Pathol Res Pract. 1999;195:859‐863. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Roth C, Hinney B, Peter M, Steinberger D, Lakomek M. Features of Antley‐Bixler syndrome in an infant born to a mother with pregnancy luteoma. Eur J Pediatr. 2000;159:189‐192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Banerjee A, Tahmasebi F, Myola E, Yoong W. Luteoma of pregnancy. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;26:572‐574. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Dahl SK, Thomas MA, Williams DB, Robins JC. Maternal virilization due to luteoma associated with delayed lactation. Fertil Steril. 2006;2008(90):e17‐e19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Tan ML, Lam SL, Nadarajah S. Pregnancy luteoma presenting as ovarian torsion with rupture and intra‐abdominal bleeding. Singapore Med J. 2008;49:e78‐e81. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Ugaki H, Enomoto T, Tokugawa Y, Kimura T. Luteoma‐induced fetal virilization. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2009;35:991‐993. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Nanda A, Gokhale UA, Pillai GR. Bilateral pregnancy luteoma: a case report. Oman Med J. 2014;29:371‐372. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Burandt E, Young RH. Pregnancy luteoma: a study of 20 cases on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of its description by Dr. William H. Sternberg, with an emphasis on the common presence of follicle‐like spaces and their diagnostic implications. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38:239‐244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Verma V, Paul S, Chahal KS, Singh J. Pregnancy luteoma: a rare case report. Int J Appl Basic Med Res. 2016;6:282‐283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Smolarczyk K, Pniewski T, Smolarczyk R, Adaszewska A, Majewski S. Unusual course of acne Conglobata as a skin manifestation due to bilateral luteoma of pregnancy. Ann Dermatol. 2019;31(Suppl):S59‐S61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Shen J, Tang L, Huang G, Bai X, Li B, Wang Z. Analysis of the clinical characteristics and neonatal outcomes of seven cases of pregnancy luteoma discovered incidentally at cesarean section. Gynecol Obstet Clin Med. 2021;1:83‐86. [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Mvunta DH, Amiji F, Suleiman M, et al. Hirsutism caused by pregnancy luteoma in a low‐resource setting: a case report and literature review. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol. 2021;2021:6695117‐6695119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Wang L, Zhou C, Jiang J, Zhang Z, Li X, Zhang W. Clinicopathologic features of pregnancy luteoma. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2022;159:351‐356. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Wang Y, Zhou F, Qin JL, Qian ZD, Huang LL. Pregnancy luteoma followed with massive ascites and elevated CA125 after ovulation induction therapy: a case report and review of literatures. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8:1491‐1493. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Tannus JF, Hertzberg BS, Haystead CM, Paulson EK. Unilateral luteoma of pregnancy mimicking a malignant ovarian mass on magnetic resonance and ultrasound. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;29:713‐717. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Seema D. Luteoma of pregnancy with uterine leiomyoma as a diagnostic challenge and mimicker of ovarian malignancy: a rare case from rural India. J Reprod Infertil. 2022;23:67‐70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Rodriguez M, Harrison TA, Nowacki MR, Saltzman AK. Luteoma of pregnancy presenting with massive ascites and markedly elevated CA 125. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;94:854. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Choi JR, Levine D, Finberg H. Luteoma of pregnancy: sonographic findings in two cases. J Ultrasound Med. 2000;19:877‐881. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Warmann S, Roth C, Glüer S, Fuchs J. Congenital adrenal hyperplasia associated with maternal pregnancy luteoma and the Antley‐Bixler syndrome. J Pediatr Surg. 2000;35:528‐530. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Mazza V, di Monte I, Ceccarelli PL, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of female pseudohermaphroditism associated with bilateral luteoma of pregnancy: case report. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:821‐824. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Wang HK, Sheu MH, Guo WY, Hong CH, Chang CY. Magnetic resonance imaging of pregnancy luteoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2003;27:155‐157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Kao HW, Wu CJ, Chung KT, Wang SR, Chen CY. MR imaging of pregnancy luteoma: a case report and correlation with the clinical features. Korean J Radiol. 2005;6:44‐46. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Wang YC, Su HY, Liu JY, Chang FW, Chen CH. Maternal and female fetal virilization caused by pregnancy luteomas. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:509‐509.e17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Spitzer RF, Wherrett D, Chitayat D, et al. Maternal luteoma of pregnancy presenting with virilization of the female infant. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2007;29:835‐840. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Masarie K, Katz V, Balderston K. Pregnancy luteomas: clinical presentations and management strategies. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2010;65:575‐582. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Dasari S, Rangaram P, Gundabattula SR, Joseph E. Bilateral luteomas of pregnancy. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;33:521. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Wadzinski TL, Altowaireb Y, Gupta R, Conroy R, Shoukri K. Luteoma of pregnancy associated with nearly complete virilization of genetically female twins. Endocr Pract. 2014;20:e18‐e23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Rapisarda V, Pedalino F, Santonocito VC, Cavalli G, Zarbo G. Luteoma of pregnancy presenting with severe maternal virilisation: a case report. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol. 2016;2016:3523760‐3523764. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Khurana A, O'Boyle M. Luteoma of pregnancy. Ultrasound Q. 2017;33:90‐92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Brar RK, Bharti JN, Nigam JS, Sehgal S, Singh HP, Ojha P. Pregnancy luteoma in ectopic pregnancy: a case report. J Reprod Infertil. 2017;18:333‐335. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Andreotti RF, Timmerman D, Strachowski LM, et al. O‐RADS US risk stratification and management system: a consensus guideline from the ACR ovarian‐adnexal reporting and data system committee. Radiology. 2020;294:168‐185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Honoré LH, O'Hara KE. Incidental pregnancy luteoma associated with ectopic tubo‐ovarian pregnancy: evidence in favor of origin from theca interna of an atretic follicle. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1978;8:15‐19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Agarwal I, Begum J, Singupuram NP. Luteoma of pregnancy presenting as ruptured ectopic pregnancy: a case report. Cureus. 2022;14:e30900. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Ozdegirmenci O, Kayikcioglu F, Haberal A, Ozfuttu A. Krukenberg tumor mimicking pregnancy luteoma. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2007;23:482‐485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Tanaka YO, Okada S, Sakata A, et al. A metastatic ovarian tumor mimicking pregnancy luteoma found during puerperium. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2016;15:149‐150. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Timmerman D, Planchamp F, Bourne T, et al. ESGO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021;58:148‐168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Table S1

AOGS-103-740-s001.docx (13.6KB, docx)

Table S2

AOGS-103-740-s002.docx (47.7KB, docx)

Articles from Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica are provided here courtesy of Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology (NFOG) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

RESOURCES