Microscopical examination revealed typical morphology of leiomyomas in most of the sections, consisting of perpendicularly oriented smooth muscle fascicles made up of spindleshaped cells with oval tapering nuclei (Figure 2). Rarely polygonal, large cells with eosinophilic cytoplasm and pleomorphic nuclei were seen. Tumor originating from the wall of the renal vein was observed (Figure 3a). Although twenty samples of tumoral tissue were taken for microscopic examination, increased mitotic activity including typical and atypical mitoses were seen in only two sections. Number of mitoses was 6/10 HPF (high power field) in these areas (Figure 2). Focal myxoid change and areas of necrosis were also noted microscopically. No vascular invasion was detected. Immunohistochemically, tumoral cells were stained positively with smooth muscle actin and desmin (Figure 3b). CD34 (Figure 3c) and S-100 protein were not detected. With these findings, tumor was diagnosed as low-grade leiomyosarcoma.
As the tumor was evaluated as low grade and no perirenal infiltration was observed, nephrectomy without chemotherapy or radiotherapy was preferred as a treatment modality. The patient is still alive without metastases or recurrences two years after the diagnosis.
Leiomyosarcomas of renal vein are more frequent in women and left kidney is predominantly involved site, as in our case[2,6]. This could be explained by growth and proliferation of smooth muscle which could be influenced by estrogenic stimulation[2]. Deyrup et al suggested that this predominancy is due to the length of the left renal vein, which is more than the right vein[2].
Preoperative diagnosis for primary leiomyosarcoma of renal vein is very difficult[2]. Clinical symptoms which do not differ from other renal tumors include abdominal pain, loss of weight, palpable mass and hematuria[2]. Leiomyosarcoma can not be differentiated from renal cell carcinoma radiologically[5,7]. Diagnosis is classically made by a pathologist as in our case.
Our case represents a low-grade variant which requires differential diagnosis from leiomyoma. The most important tools to make this distinction are mitotic counts and presence of necrosis[2]. But while high mitotic activity correlates with a higher rate of metastasis, low number of mitoses does not always indicate a good course[2]. It should be emphasized that extensive sampling is required for differential diagnosis of leiomyosarcoma from leiomyoma. Necrosis is seen in 90% of renal leiomyosarcomas and it is considered as a feature of malignancy[6]. Myxoid change may be seen focally as in our case, but importance of myxoid change on prognosis is unknown[6]. Immunohistochemically, leiomyosarcomas are usually stained with smooth muscle actin and desmin dyes[2,4-6] and occasionally with CD34[2]. The location and the size of the tumor (<3 cm) are the other important prognostic factors of vascular leiomyosarcomas[2,8].
Leiomyosarcomas usually show infiltration into perirenal adipose tissue. Local recurrence is reported in 40% of the cases and distant metastases are primarily to the lungs, followed by liver and bones[1,2,9,10]. Metastatic tumors are frequently high grade tumors. No metastases or recurrences were seen in our case during the 2 year follow-up period. Tumors originating from vena cava inferior show more aggressive course than those arising from renal vein[3].
The suggested primary treatment of kidney leiomyosarcoma is radical nephrectomy, followed by chemotherapy and radiotherapy for high grade tumors[1,2]. Partial nephrectomy may be another choice of treatment for small sized leiomyosarcomas as Cocuzza et al suggested[9]. Large and low-grade tumors are treated by nephrectomy alone as in our case.
1) Lemos GC, El Hayek OR, Apezzato M. Leiomyosarcoma of the renal vein. Int Braz J Urol 2003;29:43-14.
2) Aguilar IC, Benavente VA, Pow-Sang MR, Morante CM, Meza L, Destefano V, et al. Leiomyosarcoma of the renal vein: case report and review of the literature. Urol Oncol 2005;23:22-26
3) Kwon TW, Sung KB, Cho YP, Kim DK, Yang SM, Ro JY, Kim GE. Pararenal leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava. J Korean Med Sci 2003;18:355-359.
4) Brandes SB, Chelsky MJ, Petersen RO, Greenberg RE. Leiomyosarcoma of the renal vein. J Surg Oncol 1996;63:195-200.
5) Minami H, Ueki O, Tanaka T, Nishida H, Hashimoto T, Kawaguchi K. Case of leiomyosarcoma of the renal pelvis. Int J Urol 2004;11:122-124.
6) Deyrup AT, Montgomery E, Fisher C. Leiomyosarcoma of the Kidney- A Clinicopathologic Study. Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:178-182.
7) Maeda T, Tateishi U, Fujimoto H, Kanai Y, Sugimura K, Arai Y. Leiomyosarcoma of the renal vein: arterial encasement on contrast-enhanced dynamic computed tomography. Int J Urol 2006;13:611-612.
8) Soulie M. Leiomyosarcoma of the renal vein. Prog Urol 2001;11:502-506 (abstract only).
9) Cocuzza M, Arap S, Lucon AM, Saldanha LB. Renal leiomyosarcoma treated with partial nephrectomy. Clinics 2005;60:345-346.
10) Grignon D, Ro J, Papadopoulus N, Ayala A. Leiomyosarcoma of renal vein. Urology 1991;38:255-258.