Skip to main content
BMJ Case Reports logoLink to BMJ Case Reports
. 2021 Oct 7;14(10):e244800. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2021-244800

Intraosseous solitary myofibroma of the orbit in an adolescent woman

Ruchi Goel 1,, Ayushi Agarwal 1, Shweta Raghav 1, Ravindra Kumar Saran 2
PMCID: PMC8499239  PMID: 34620635

Abstract

A 16-year-old woman presented with a painless, progressive, hard swelling in the left inferolateral orbital wall for the past 1 year. There was no diminution of vision or limitation of ocular motility. Imaging revealed an intraosseous, well-defined, expansile, soft tissue lesion in the inferolateral wall of the left orbit. A left anterior orbitotomy with complete surgical excision was performed. Histopathological evaluation of the specimen revealed fascicular pattern of spindle cells with a rich network of slit-like, branching blood vessels. Tumour cells exhibited smooth muscle actin and vimentin positivity but were negative for CD-34 and STAT-6. In absence of any systemic manifestation, a diagnosis of intraosseous solitary orbital myofibroma was made. The case highlights the importance of integrating clinical, radiological and histopathological features in overcoming the diagnostic challenge of differentiating myofibroma from other mesenchymal neoplasms. It also brings forth the importance of complete resection and curettage to prevent recurrence.

Keywords: ophthalmology, pathology

Background

Myofibroma, a spindle-cell neoplasm, closely resembles other mesenchymal tumours, posing a diagnostic challenge.1 It may manifest as a solitary mass, have a multicentric involvement or can be generalised, with multifocal and visceral disturbances.2 The solitary form generally presents as a unilateral, gradually progressive, painless mass during infancy or childhood. In the orbit, the mass is usually extraosseous in location and may be associated with bony involvement.3 4

Herein, we describe a rare case of an intraosseous solitary myofibroma of the orbit occurring in an adolescent female. The report showcases the importance of imaging and Immunohistochemistry (IHC) in the diagnosis and management of this rare tumour.

Case presentation

A 16-year-old woman presented with a gradually progressive, painless mass in the inferolateral orbital wall for the past 1 year. There was no history of trauma or any systemic illness. No significant birth or family history could be elicited. On examination, the visual acuity was 20/20 and the anterior segment, pupillary reaction and funduscopy of both the eyes was within normal limits. A well-defined, non-tender, immobile mass was palpable in the inferolateral aspect of the left orbit. The mass was hard in consistency and appeared fixed to the underlying bone with no overlying skin changes. There was a vertical and horizontal dystopia of 2 mm, displacing the left globe superomedially (figure 1). The swelling was transillumination-negative and did not demonstrate any change in size with Valsalva manoeuvre. There was no evidence of proptosis, limitation of extraocular muscle movements or lymphadenopathy.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Clinical photograph showing (A) swelling over the lateral aspect of the left lower lid causing superomedial displacement of the globe (B) oblique view.

Investigations and treatment

A non-contrast CT scan of the orbit revealed a well-circumscribed, intraosseous, spherical, expansile lesion, measuring 2.6×1.7×1.5 cm, in the inferolateral wall (zygomatic bone) of the left orbit, associated with severe thinning of the expanded cortices. The heterogeneous lesion exhibited soft tissue attenuation and exerted mass effect over the adjacent globe (figure 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

CT scan orbit (A) axial view (B) coronal view, showing an intraosseous, soft tissue mass in the left zygomatic bone (arrows), abutting the globe.

Due to the intraosseous location, fine-needle aspiration cytology could not be performed, and an excision biopsy was planned. Through a transcutaneous approach, deroofing of the bony wall surrounding the mass was done using an electric saw. The mass was extricated using a periosteum elevator and bone curette, and removed in-toto. On gross examination, a well-circumscribed, reddish-grey mass, measuring, 3.2×1.5×1 cm, was seen (figure 3). The histopathological evaluation of the excised specimen revealed a well-circumscribed, spindle cell tumour with variable cellularity, nearly replacing the cancellous bone. Periosteum, occasional bony spicules and periorbital fat were noted in the outer area. Short fascicles of spindle-shaped cells exhibiting moderate eosinophilic cytoplasm, regular nuclei and inconspicuous nucleoli, with numerous thin-walled, slit-like, branching blood vessels dispersed in the sparse collagenous stroma were seen. Occasional multinucleated giant cells were noted in the peripheral area. No evidence of mitosis, necrosis, atypia or pleomorphism was found (figure 4). On IHC staining, tumour fascicles demonstrated positivity for smooth muscle actin (SMA) and vimentin, and were negative for desmin, H-caldesmon, epithelial membrane antigen, beta-catenin, S-100, anaplastic lymphoma kinase 1 (ALK-1) and STAT 6 (figure 5). CD-34 marker highlighted the vascular endothelial cells but stained negative for tumour cells.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Gross examination of the excised specimen, revealing a well-circumscribed, reddish-grey mass.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Histopathological examination of the specimen, H&E stain, (A) ×10, showing a well-circumscribed spindle cell tumour with variable cellularity (white arrow). The bony spicules (black arrow) are noted in the periphery. (B) ×40, showing short fascicles of spindle cells, devoid of atypia, pleomorphism or mitosis, along with numerous slit-like blood vessels. (C) ×40, showing numerous branching, staghorn-like vessels (arrow), along with spindle cells. (D) ×20, showing occasional multinucleated giant cells in the peripheral region (arrow).

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Immunohistochemistry (A) ×20, revealing dense cytoplasmic smooth muscle actin positivity for tumour cells. The smooth muscle cells of the blood vessels are acting as an internal control (arrow). (B) ×10, depicting negative staining for STAT-6.

No multicentric or visceral involvement was found on performing a comprehensive clinical examination along with CT scan chest, abdomen and pelvis. Thus, a definitive diagnosis of an intraosseous solitary orbital myofibroma was made.

Outcome and follow-up

The patient underwent an uneventful recovery and achieved satisfactory functional and cosmetic outcomes. Postoperatively, no limitation of extraocular movements was observed. A repeat orbital CT scan at 3 years following excision did not show any recurrence or evidence of residual disease (figure 6).

Figure 6.

Figure 6

(A) Clinical photographs showing complete resolution of the swelling following surgery and normal extraocular movements in all gazes. (B) Contrast-enhanced CT scan orbit, axial view, soft tissue window and (C) coronal section, bone window, revealing complete resolution of the lesion with mild bony remodelling and expanded cortex at the site of surgery. No evidence of soft tissue lesion is seen.

Discussion

Myofibroma is a benign mesenchymal neoplasm which most commonly affects head and neck, trunk and extremities of the body.1 5 Isolated orbital involvement is uncommon in occurrence, with only a few cases reported until.3 4

The multifocal disease, also referred to as myofibromatosis, usually affects females, and shows a dominant pattern of inheritance. It is associated with a poorer prognosis and higher risk of mortality. On the contrary, solitary myofibroma usually manifests sporadically and exhibits a favourable prognosis.6 7

Although the exact etiopathogenesis of a solitary orbital myofibroma is unknown, one third of these cases are congenital. In some cases, trauma has been implicated as the provoking agent.5 In our patient, none of these factors could be recognised. The basis for predilection of these tumours for the left side of the orbit, as also seen in this case, is yet to be identified.7

In the orbit, solitary myofibroma most commonly manifests as a unilateral, gradually progressive mass which may be associated with adjacent bony erosion, bone remodelling or bone defect.3 8 9 Intraosseous myofibroma may possess ill-defined margins, simulating a malignancy.3 In our patient though the mass was intraosseous, the margins were well defined and there was thinning of the adjacent bone.

In view of the CT scan findings and clinical features, the differential diagnosis included benign disorders such as fibrous histiocytoma, solitary fibrous tumour (SFT), Langerhans cell histiocytosis, fibro-osseous lesions like non-ossifying fibroma (NOF) and fibrous dysplasia of the orbit, schwannoma and neurofibroma. Additionally, owing to the bony hard consistency, the intraosseous nature of the mass and presentation at a young age, malignant lesions such as fibrosarcoma, Ewing’s sarcoma and osteosarcoma were also kept as a possibility. Following the availability of histopathological report, the presence of the short fascicles of spindle cells, devoid of atypia, mitosis, inflammation or pleomorphism, along with an abundant network of staghorn-like, branching blood vessels, ruled out malignancy. Based on the histopathology, the differential diagnoses narrowed down to solitary myofibroma, SFT, vascular variant of leiomyoma, NOF and nodular fasciitis. Thereafter, IHC staining was performed which was positive for SMA and vimentin and negative for desmin, CD-34, S-100, ALK-1, H-caldesmon and STAT-6. This confirmed the myofibroblastic nature of the tumour, clinching the diagnosis of a solitary orbital myofibroma.

SFT, an important diagnostic consideration in this case owing to similar histopathological findings, was ruled out based on negative staining of tumour cells with both, CD-34 and STAT 6.10 11

Vascular leiomyoma is represented by dilated sinusoidal capillaries and shows concentric layering of vascular smooth muscles around the blood vessels, which differed from our histopathological findings. These tumours reveal intense immunostaining for SMA as well as positivity for desmin, vimentin, CD-34 and CD-31.12 13 Moreover, unlike a solitary myofibroma which may occasionally harbour multinucleated giant cells, these have never been described in case of leiomyoma.7

NOF is histologically characterised by a storiform pattern of fibroblast-like spindle cells, intermixed with xanthoma cells, multinucleated giant cells and lymphocytes, and thus, did not qualify as our primary diagnosis. Furthermore, this benign, fibrohistiocytic proliferative tumour usually affects the long bones, and rarely the mandible and maxilla.14 Nodular fasciitis was ruled out due to absence of inflammatory infiltrates and the intraosseous location.6 7 15–17

It was only after correlating the clinical features, the distinctive intraosseous location, and the histopathological features, that a plausible diagnosis of solitary myofibroma could be made.

Although a few studies recommend a conservative approach on the grounds of spontaneous resolution seen in some cases, surgical excision remains the first line of management in case of a solitary orbital myofibroma.18 Attempt should be made to excise the lesion in-toto, as was done in this patient, to minimise recurrence.3 19 Although the recurrence rate is less than 10% after excision, the tumour has been shown to recur as late as 6 months following surgical intervention, thus warranting a close follow- up.7 For intraosseous tumours, additional bone curettage may be required, as was performed in our case, and there was no recurrence in the 3 years of follow-up.

As rare is the occurrence of solitary myofibroma in the orbit, rarer is its presentation in adulthood with only three cases reported in the literature until.20–22 To the best of our knowledge, our case is the first report of an intraosseous solitary orbital myofibroma in a patient over the age of 12 years (table 1).

Table 1.

A review of cases of solitary orbital myofibroma in adolescence and adulthood

Author Age/
sex
Presenting sign Duration Site Imaging Histology T/t Outcome
(follow-up)
Servat20 47 yrs/F Painful proptosis, diminution of vision 10 months Right orbito cranial Osteolytic lesion with expansion of adjacent bone, extending into frontal sinus and frontal lobe Mixture of spindle and epithelioid cells IHC—vimentin and SMA positivity Surgical excision No recurrence, (11 months)
Hemlatha et al 26 yrs/F Bilateral microphthalmia with left LL nodular swelling Not mentioned Left orbit Not mentioned Biphasic pattern, peripheral myofibroblastic and central hemangio—pericytoma-like pattern. Focal areas of adipose tissue.
IHC—vimentin positivity
Surgical excision Not mentioned
Morrow22 24 yrs/F Left eyelid swelling 6 months Left orbit Extraosseous, extraconal mass in the superior aspect of left orbit Spindle cell neoplasm
IHC—desmin and SMA positivity
Surgical excision Not mentioned
Our case 16 yrs/F Left LL swelling 2 years Left orbit Intraosseous, heterogeneous spherical expansile lesion in the zygomatic bone (inferolateral wall) of the left orbit Spindle cell neoplasm with branching vessels, few giant cells, bony spicules, and periorbital fat seen in the periphery.
IHC—SMA and
vimentin positivity
Surgical excision No recurrence, (36 months)

F, female; IHC, immunohistochemistry; LL, lower lid; SMA, smooth muscle actin; T/t, treatment.;

To conclude, intraosseous solitary orbital myofibroma can occur beyond infancy and childhood and must be considered as an important diagnostic consideration in any case of a well-defined solitary orbital mass. A stepwise, integrated approach is crucial in diagnosis and appropriate management. The clinician must be mindful of possibility of recurrence or subsequent visceral and multicentric involvement, highlighting the need for a long-term follow-up.

Patient’s perspective.

I had a large swelling on face below the left eye for 1 year. It did not look good so I avoided going out. I then underwent surgery and the swelling disappeared. Thankfully, doctors told me it was not cancer. I have regained my confidence now and I am happy.

Learning points.

  • Solitary myofibroma should be considered as a differential diagnosis in any case of a well-defined orbital mass.

  • For a definitive diagnosis of rare tumours like solitary myofibroma, correlation of clinical, radiological and histopathological features, including detailed immunohistochemistry, is required.

  • Meticulous surgical excision with bony curettage prevents recurrence.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge Swati Gupta, Associate Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Maulana Azad Medical College, for helping with radiological evaluation and Omeshwer Koli, Junior Resident, Guru Nanak Eye Centre, Maulana Azad Medical College, for assisting in data acquisition.

Footnotes

Contributors: AA, SR and RG drafted the manuscript, edited the images and did the literature search. RG, AA, RKS and SR edited and finalised the manuscript. RG and SR managed the patient. RKS helped in reaching the diagnosis and interpreted the histopathological images. RG is the corresponding author and assumes responsibility for the case report.

Funding: The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests: None declared.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication

Consent obtained from parent(s)/guardian(s).

References

  • 1.Chung EB, Enzinger FM. Infantile myofibromatosis. Cancer 1981;48:1807–18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Wiswell TE, Sakas EL, Stephenson SR, et al. Infantile myofibromatosis. Pediatrics 1985;76:981–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Rodrigues EB, Shields CL, Eagle RC, et al. Solitary Intraosseous orbital myofibroma in four cases. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;22:292–5. 10.1097/01.iop.0000226900.79557.cf [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Madhuri BK, Tripathy D, Mittal R. Solitary orbital myofibroma in a child: a rare case report with literature review. Indian J Ophthalmol 2019;67:1240–5. 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1553_18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Stout AP. Juvenile fibromatoses. Cancer 1954;7:953–78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Jennings TA, Duray PH, Collins FS, et al. Infantile myofibromatosis. Evidence for an autosomal-dominant disorder. Am J Surg Pathol 1984;8:529–38. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Mynatt CJ, Feldman KA, Thompson LDR. Orbital infantile myofibroma: a case report and clinicopathologic review of 24 cases from the literature. Head Neck Pathol 2011;5:205–15. 10.1007/s12105-011-0260-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Shields CL, Husson M, Shields JA, et al. Solitary Intraosseous infantile myofibroma of the orbital roof. Arch Ophthalmol 1998;116:1528–30. 10.1001/archopht.116.11.1528 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Nam DH, Moon HS, Chung DH, et al. Solitary infantile myofibroma of the orbital bone. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2005;33:549–52. 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2005.01084.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Yalcin CE, Tihan T. Solitary fibrous Tumor/Hemangiopericytoma dichotomy revisited: a restless family of neoplasms in the CNS. Adv Anat Pathol 2016;23:104–11. 10.1097/PAP.0000000000000103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Broggi G, Salvatorelli L, Reibaldi M, et al. Solitary fibrous tumor of the orbital region: report of a case with emphasis on the diagnostic utility of STAT-6. Pathologica 2020;112:195–9. 10.32074/1591-951X-9-20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Guilbert M-C, Samouëlian V, Rahimi K. Uterine leiomyoma with osteoclast-like giant cells. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2016;35:30–2. 10.1097/PGP.0000000000000204 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Sendul SY, Atilgan CU, Kabukcuoglu F, et al. Anterior orbital leiomyoma originating from the supraorbital neurovascular bundle. SAGE Open Med Case Rep 2017;5:2050313X17740991:2050313X1774099. 10.1177/2050313X17740991 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Abdelsayed RA, Sharma S, Ferguson H. Fibrous cortical defect (nonossifying fibroma) of the mandibular ramus: report of 2 cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010;110:504–8. 10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.04.047 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Compton CJ, Clark JD, Thompson MP, et al. Nodular fasciitis of the orbit. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg 2016;32:e154–6. 10.1097/IOP.0000000000000346 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Tom Liu R, Henkelman E, Popescu O, et al. Nodular fasciitis: a rapidly enlarging destructive periorbital mass in an infant. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2019;13:119–21. 10.1016/j.ajoc.2018.04.019 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Mukherjee B, Mittal S. Peri-Orbital nodular fasciitis in a child. Orbit 2012;31:124–5. 10.3109/01676830.2011.605509 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Tokano H, Ishikawa N, Kitamura K, et al. Solitary infantile myofibromatosis in the lateral orbit floor showing spontaneous regression. J Laryngol Otol 2001;115:419–21. 10.1258/0022215011907811 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Linder JS, Harris GJ, Segura AD. Periorbital infantile myofibromatosis. Arch Ophthalmol 1996;114:219–22. 10.1001/archopht.1996.01100130213022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Servat JJ, Williamson JE, Piepmeier J, et al. Giant myofibroma of the orbit in an adult male. Orbit 2012;31:21–3. 10.3109/01676830.2011.605501 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.A L H, Sindhuram V S, U A. Myfibroma which was associated with a rudimentary eyeball, which Masqueraded as an ocular palpebral cyst. J Clin Diagn Res 2013;7:557–9. 10.7860/JCDR/2013/5095.2824 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Morrow NC, Tanas MR, Syed NA, et al. Solitary adult orbital myofibroma: report of a case and review of the literature. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2020;20:100955. 10.1016/j.ajoc.2020.100955 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from BMJ Case Reports are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES