Giant primary retroperitoneal seminoma: A case report

Nataša Janjušević; Darko Mirković; Milan Jovanović; Maja Vulović; Boško Milev; Miroslav Mitrović; Bratislav Trifunović

doi:10.2298/7614

Nataša Janjušević Faculty of Medicine, Military Medical Academy, University of Defense, Belgrade
Darko Mirković Clinic for General Surgery, Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, Serbia; Faculty of Medicine of the Military Medical Academy, University of Defense, Belgrade, Serbia
Milan Jovanović Clinic for General Surgery, Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, Serbia; Faculty of Medicine of the Military Medical Academy, University of Defense, Belgrade, Serbia
Maja Vulović Department of Anatomy and Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia
Boško Milev Clinic for General Surgery, Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, Serbia
Miroslav Mitrović Clinic for General Surgery, Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, Serbia
Bratislav Trifunović Clinic for General Surgery, Military Medical Academy, Belgrade, Serbia; Faculty of Medicine of the Military Medical Academy, University of Defense, Belgrade, Serbia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/7614

Keywords: seminoma, retroperitoneal space, venous thrombosis, diagnosis, differential, digestive system surgical procedures, orchiectomy,

Abstract

Introduction. Primary extragonadal seminomas are rare tumors. There have been only a few cases of the primary retroperitoneal seminomas reported in the literature up to date. Case report. We reported a 56-year-old man with giant primary retroperitoneal seminoma presented with the enlargement of the left side of the abdomen and deep venous thrombosis of the left leg. Computed tomography of the abdomen showed a large tumor occupying the left part of the retroperitoneal space with 23 ´ 13 cm in diameter. Firm tumor mass having 25 ´ 15 cm in diameter was surgically removed from the left retroperitoneum. The tumor adhered the tunica adventitia of the aorta and it was carefully resected from the aortic wall. The diagnosis of seminoma was made during histopathological examination. The patient underwent chemotherapy. Two years after finished chemotherapy the patient accepted left orchiectomy with the aim of eliminating the possibility of the occult malignancy of the testicle. Histopathological analysis of the testicular tissue was normal and the diagnosis of primary retroperitoneal seminoma was confirmed. Conclusion. Despite its small incidence in general population, the diagnosis of retroperitoneal seminoma should be considered in male patients with nonspecific symptoms and with retroperitoneal tumor mass.

References

Boujelbene N, Cosinschi A, Boujelbene N, Khanfir K, Bhagwati S, Herrmann E, et al. Pure seminoma: A review and update. Radiat Oncol 2011; 6(1): 90.

Patel A, Wilson L, Rane A. Primary retroperitoneal seminoma presenting with inferior vena caval obstruction. N Z Med J 2005; 118(1226): U1758.

Chiumento C, Fiorentino A, Tartarone A, Lapadula L, Caivano R, Cozzolino M, et al. A case report of retroperitoneal seminoma and literature review. J Nucl Med Radiat Ther 2013; 4(1): 148.

Friedman NB. The comparative morphogenesis of extragenital and gonadal teratoid tumors. Cancer 1951; 4(2): 265−76.

Bokemeyer C, Droz JP, Horwich A, Gerl A, Fossa SD, Beyer J, et al. Extragonadal seminoma. Cancer 2001; 91(7): 1394−401.

Hatem MA, So B. Primary retroperitoneal seminoma presented as gastrointestinal bleeding. J Biomed Graph Comp 2014; 4(4): 8−11.