Display options
Cite
Namaky D, Basil J, Pavelka J. Placental site trophoblastic tumor presenting as an intramural mass with negative markers: an opportunity for novel diagnosis and treatment with robotic hysterectomy. J Robot Surg. 2010;4(1):57-9doi: 10.1007/s11701-010-0178-y.
Namaky, D., Basil, J., & Pavelka, J. (2010). Placental site trophoblastic tumor presenting as an intramural mass with negative markers: an opportunity for novel diagnosis and treatment with robotic hysterectomy. Journal of robotic surgery, 4(1), 57-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-010-0178-y
Namaky, Devin, et al. "Placental site trophoblastic tumor presenting as an intramural mass with negative markers: an opportunity for novel diagnosis and treatment with robotic hysterectomy." Journal of robotic surgery vol. 4,1 (2010): 57-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-010-0178-y
Namaky D, Basil J, Pavelka J. Placental site trophoblastic tumor presenting as an intramural mass with negative markers: an opportunity for novel diagnosis and treatment with robotic hysterectomy. J Robot Surg. 2010 May;4(1):57-9. doi: 10.1007/s11701-010-0178-y. Epub 2010 Mar 18. PMID: 27638575.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Robot Surg. 2010 May;4(1):57-9. doi: 10.1007/s11701-010-0178-y. Epub 2010 Mar 18.

Placental site trophoblastic tumor presenting as an intramural mass with negative markers: an opportunity for novel diagnosis and treatment with robotic hysterectomy.

Journal of robotic surgery

Devin Namaky, Jack Basil, James Pavelka

Affiliations

  1. Divison of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Good Samaritan Hospital, 375 Dixmyth Ave, Cincinnati, OH, 45220, USA. [email protected].
  2. Divison of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Good Samaritan Hospital, 375 Dixmyth Ave, Cincinnati, OH, 45220, USA.

PMID: 27638575 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-010-0178-y

Abstract

A patient presented with persistent levels of quantitative human chorionic gonadotropin despite therapy with methotrexate. A dilation and curettage procedure did not provide a pathologic diagnosis. Gestational trophoblastic disease was suspected, but serum biomarkers were unable to provide a pre-operative diagnosis. A mass was found in the uterus by ultrasound and subsequent computed tomography scans. There was no evidence of extrauterine disease, but the uterine mass was continuous with the endometrial cavity, evoking the suspicion of an invasive endometrial mass. The patient underwent robotic hysterectomy for both therapy and diagnosis of suspected gestational trophoblastic disease (GTD). The final pathologic diagnosis was placental site trophoblastic tumor. The robotic approach allows for a minimally invasive surgical procedure with thorough examination of the pelvic cavity and adnexae and does not require a uterine manipulator which may be contra-indicated in the setting of uterine GTD. For patients with suspected persistent uterine GTD who are otherwise candidates for minimally invasive surgery, a robotic procedure offers advantages when compared to traditional laparoscopy or vaginal hysterectomy.

Keywords: Gestational trophoblastic disease; Human; Hysterectomy; Placental lactogen; Placental site trophoblastic tumor

References

  1. Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Aug;102(2):160-4 - PubMed
  2. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006 Mar-Apr;16(2):882-3 - PubMed
  3. Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Mar;112(3):663-72 - PubMed
  4. Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Oct;88(4 Pt 2):696-9 - PubMed

Publication Types