Skip to main content
BMJ Case Reports logoLink to BMJ Case Reports
. 2021 Nov 11;14(11):e244364. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2021-244364

Neurofibroma in the retroperitoneum associated with neurofibromatosis type 1

Hiroaki Saito 1, Tsuyoshi Suda 1,, Masako Kobayashi 2, Eiki Matsushita 1
PMCID: PMC8587565  PMID: 34764103

Description

A 71-year-old woman presented with epigastric pain after having meals visited our hospital. On examination, she was diagnosed with gallstone cholecystitis, complicated with common bile duct stones.

She was treated appropriately, and her conditions improved. It was fortuitously noted that she had a retroperitoneal mass with a maximum diameter of >10 cm surrounding the abdominal aorta (figure 1A).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

(A) Contrast-enhanced CT scan indicating a retroperitoneal mass around the abdominal aorta. (B) Numerous neurofibromas appearing on the back.

However, she had no associated symptoms.

Considering this finding, we repeated the physical examination and medical interview. Several neurofibromas and café-au-lait spots were noted on the body, and a detailed interview revealed that she had been diagnosed with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) previously (figure 1B). Contrast-enhanced CT showed a mild contrast around the mass. Positron emission tomography/CT (PET/CT) showed mild accumulation of the mass: the maximum standardised uptake value (SUVmax) was 3.7. Therefore, we assumed that the mass was a neurofibroma associated with NF1; however, we could not exclude the possibility of a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour (MPNST) based on imaging studies alone. Therefore, a tumour biopsy was performed simultaneously with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for a definitive diagnosis. The pathological diagnosis was confirmed as neurofibroma rather than MPNST because no positive findings for malignancy were observed (figure 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Histological samples showing spindle-shaped cells, although no increase in cell density or mitosis was observed, and immunohistochemical staining showing positivity for S-100 protein, leading to the diagnosis of neurofibroma.

Until 4 years after the biopsy, the patient has been followed-up by imaging, and the neurofibroma in the retroperitoneum has been stable in size.

MPNSTs can arise from any neurofibroma, regardless of location, and patients with NF1 may have MPNSTs, especially in the retroperitoneum.1 The prognosis of MPNSTs may be poor because of their rapid growth and the possibility of distant metastasis.2 Furthermore, retroperitoneal tumours rarely present with specific symptoms, and delayed diagnosis is one of the factors for poor prognosis.2 3 The lifetime risk of developing MPNST in patients with NF1 patients is estimated to be 8%–13%.4 Although it is difficult to predict the occurrence of MPNST, it should be noted that MPNST is more common in adolescents, and symptoms such as pain may occur. Furthermore, imaging studies may show a rapidly enlarging mass.5 6 International guidelines, such as the European Society for Medical Oncology, recommend performing a core-needle CT scan-guided biopsy for diagnosis, and surgical resection of the tumour is recommended for MPNSTs even if they are asymptomatic.2 7

A report involving imaging studies suggested the possibility of MPNST in the presence of two or more of the following four findings: intratumoural cystic lesion, largest dimension >10 cm, peripheral enhancement pattern and perilesional oedema-like zone.8 Our patient presented with two features: largest dimension >10 cm and peripheral enhancement pattern, which led to the suspicion of MPNST. In contrast, another report suggested that malignancy should be considered when SUVmax exceeds 4.8 on PET/CT.9 In our patient, the SUVmax was 3.7; therefore, we did not suspect malignancy.

Since the results of MRI and PET/CT were difficult to diagnose, we performed a biopsy to produce an early diagnosis. Some reports indicate that diagnosis based on imaging studies alone is generally difficult, and careful pathological examination is necessary.4 10

If a neoplastic lesion is observed in a patient with NF1 and is strongly suspected to be malignant on imaging studies such as PET/CT, pathological examination should be performed at an early stage and surgical resection should be considered, despite the risk of invasiveness.

Learning points.

  • Neurofibromatosis type 1 may be associated with retroperitoneal tumours, among which malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumour (MPNST) is highly malignant, with rapid progression and the possibility of metastasis.

  • Retroperitoneal tumours are less likely to cause symptoms and may be detected incidentally on imaging examinations.

  • A pathological diagnosis should be considered necessary, and the patient should be closely followed because there is a possibility of malignant retroperitoneal tumours, such as MPNST.

Footnotes

Contributors: HS edited the manuscript and prepared the figures. TS cared for the patient, edited the manuscript and obtained the written informed consent from the patient. MK made the pathological diagnosis, edited the manuscript and prepared the figures. EM edited the manuscript and gave expert opinions on this case.

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.

Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

Competing interests: None declared.

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

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication

Consent obtained directly from patient(s).

References

  • 1.Yotsuya K, Hasegawa T, Yamato Y, et al. Retroperitoneal neurofibroma and a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor with neurofibromatosis type 1: a report of two cases. Spine Surg Relat Res 2020;4:369–73. 10.22603/ssrr.2020-0056 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.D’Agostino AN, Soule EH, Miller RH. Primary malignant neoplasms of nerves (malignant NEURILEMOMAS) in patients without manifestations of multiple neurofibromatosis (von Recklinghausen's disease). Cancer 1963;16:1003–14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Cavallaro G, Basile U, Polistena A, et al. Surgical management of abdominal manifestations of type 1 neurofibromatosis: experience of a single center. Am Surg 2010;76:389–96. 10.1177/000313481007600416 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Evans DGR, Baser ME, McGaughran J, et al. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours in neurofibromatosis 1. J Med Genet 2002;39:311–4. 10.1136/jmg.39.5.311 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Riccardi VM. Von Recklinghausen neurofibromatosis. N Engl J Med 1981;305:1617–27. 10.1056/NEJM198112313052704 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Farid M, Demicco EG, Garcia R, et al. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. Oncologist 2014;19:193–201. 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0328 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Casali PG, Abecassis N, Aro HT, et al. Soft tissue and visceral sarcomas: ESMO-EURACAN clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2018;29:iv51–67. 10.1093/annonc/mdy096 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Wasa J, Nishida Y, Tsukushi S, et al. Mri features in the differentiation of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors and neurofibromas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:1568–74. 10.2214/AJR.09.2724 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Nose H, Otsuka H, Otomi Y, et al. Correlations between F-18 FDG PET/CT and pathological findings in soft tissue lesions. J Med Invest 2013;60:184–90. 10.2152/jmi.60.184 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Hughes MJ, Thomas JM, Fisher C, et al. Imaging features of retroperitoneal and pelvic schwannomas. Clin Radiol 2005;60:886–93. 10.1016/j.crad.2005.01.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES