Glomeruloid peritoneal implants in ovarian serous borderline tumours - Distinction between invasive and non-invasive implants and pathogenesis

Eung Seok Lee, Anthony S Y Leong, Insun S. Kim, Young Sik Kim, Ju-Han Lee, Hyun Yee Cho

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aims: To determine whether or not the glomeruloid implants (GI) composed of papillary cores within clear spaces lined by mesothelial cells or tumour cells located in superficial or deep peritoneal tissue in ovarian serous borderline tumours (SBTs) are invasive. Methods and results: We examined the differences in incidence, histological and immunohistochemical findings among three groups: 100 GI with mesothelial cells lining clear space (type I), 100 GI with tumour cells lining clear space (type II), and 100 invasive implants with clefts but no lining cells from 30 cases of SBT with peritoneal implants. The type I lesion had characteristics of non-invasive implants with a tendency for smooth contours (100100), superficial location (71100), absence of desmoplasia (100100) and absence of surrounding destructive invasion (100100), In contrast, type II GI had irregular contours (67100), deep location (93100), presence of desmoplastic reaction (100100) and presence of destructive invasion (12100). Immunohistological studies suggested intermediate forms between the two types of lesions. Conclusions: Type I GI are non-invasive implants, whereas type II GI are invasive implants and it is important to evaluate the presence and nature of cells lining the clear space in determining whether implants associated with ovarian SBTs are invasive or not.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)505-513
Number of pages9
JournalHistopathology
Volume55
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009 Nov 1

Fingerprint

Neoplasms
Incidence

Keywords

  • Glomeruloid implants
  • Ovarian serous borderline tumours
  • Peritoneal implants

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Histology
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

Glomeruloid peritoneal implants in ovarian serous borderline tumours - Distinction between invasive and non-invasive implants and pathogenesis. / Lee, Eung Seok; Leong, Anthony S Y; Kim, Insun S.; Kim, Young Sik; Lee, Ju-Han; Cho, Hyun Yee.

In: Histopathology, Vol. 55, No. 5, 01.11.2009, p. 505-513.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a33bb7e21ba14027944df17c7c6e9979,
title = "Glomeruloid peritoneal implants in ovarian serous borderline tumours - Distinction between invasive and non-invasive implants and pathogenesis",
abstract = "Aims: To determine whether or not the glomeruloid implants (GI) composed of papillary cores within clear spaces lined by mesothelial cells or tumour cells located in superficial or deep peritoneal tissue in ovarian serous borderline tumours (SBTs) are invasive. Methods and results: We examined the differences in incidence, histological and immunohistochemical findings among three groups: 100 GI with mesothelial cells lining clear space (type I), 100 GI with tumour cells lining clear space (type II), and 100 invasive implants with clefts but no lining cells from 30 cases of SBT with peritoneal implants. The type I lesion had characteristics of non-invasive implants with a tendency for smooth contours (100100), superficial location (71100), absence of desmoplasia (100100) and absence of surrounding destructive invasion (100100), In contrast, type II GI had irregular contours (67100), deep location (93100), presence of desmoplastic reaction (100100) and presence of destructive invasion (12100). Immunohistological studies suggested intermediate forms between the two types of lesions. Conclusions: Type I GI are non-invasive implants, whereas type II GI are invasive implants and it is important to evaluate the presence and nature of cells lining the clear space in determining whether implants associated with ovarian SBTs are invasive or not.",
keywords = "Glomeruloid implants, Ovarian serous borderline tumours, Peritoneal implants",
author = "Lee, {Eung Seok} and Leong, {Anthony S Y} and Kim, {Insun S.} and Kim, {Young Sik} and Ju-Han Lee and Cho, {Hyun Yee}",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2559.2009.03409.x",
language = "English",
volume = "55",
pages = "505--513",
journal = "Histopathology",
issn = "0309-0167",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Glomeruloid peritoneal implants in ovarian serous borderline tumours - Distinction between invasive and non-invasive implants and pathogenesis

AU - Lee, Eung Seok

AU - Leong, Anthony S Y

AU - Kim, Insun S.

AU - Kim, Young Sik

AU - Lee, Ju-Han

AU - Cho, Hyun Yee

PY - 2009/11/1

Y1 - 2009/11/1

N2 - Aims: To determine whether or not the glomeruloid implants (GI) composed of papillary cores within clear spaces lined by mesothelial cells or tumour cells located in superficial or deep peritoneal tissue in ovarian serous borderline tumours (SBTs) are invasive. Methods and results: We examined the differences in incidence, histological and immunohistochemical findings among three groups: 100 GI with mesothelial cells lining clear space (type I), 100 GI with tumour cells lining clear space (type II), and 100 invasive implants with clefts but no lining cells from 30 cases of SBT with peritoneal implants. The type I lesion had characteristics of non-invasive implants with a tendency for smooth contours (100100), superficial location (71100), absence of desmoplasia (100100) and absence of surrounding destructive invasion (100100), In contrast, type II GI had irregular contours (67100), deep location (93100), presence of desmoplastic reaction (100100) and presence of destructive invasion (12100). Immunohistological studies suggested intermediate forms between the two types of lesions. Conclusions: Type I GI are non-invasive implants, whereas type II GI are invasive implants and it is important to evaluate the presence and nature of cells lining the clear space in determining whether implants associated with ovarian SBTs are invasive or not.

AB - Aims: To determine whether or not the glomeruloid implants (GI) composed of papillary cores within clear spaces lined by mesothelial cells or tumour cells located in superficial or deep peritoneal tissue in ovarian serous borderline tumours (SBTs) are invasive. Methods and results: We examined the differences in incidence, histological and immunohistochemical findings among three groups: 100 GI with mesothelial cells lining clear space (type I), 100 GI with tumour cells lining clear space (type II), and 100 invasive implants with clefts but no lining cells from 30 cases of SBT with peritoneal implants. The type I lesion had characteristics of non-invasive implants with a tendency for smooth contours (100100), superficial location (71100), absence of desmoplasia (100100) and absence of surrounding destructive invasion (100100), In contrast, type II GI had irregular contours (67100), deep location (93100), presence of desmoplastic reaction (100100) and presence of destructive invasion (12100). Immunohistological studies suggested intermediate forms between the two types of lesions. Conclusions: Type I GI are non-invasive implants, whereas type II GI are invasive implants and it is important to evaluate the presence and nature of cells lining the clear space in determining whether implants associated with ovarian SBTs are invasive or not.

KW - Glomeruloid implants

KW - Ovarian serous borderline tumours

KW - Peritoneal implants

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=71049132228&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=71049132228&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2009.03409.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2009.03409.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 19912356

AN - SCOPUS:71049132228

VL - 55

SP - 505

EP - 513

JO - Histopathology

JF - Histopathology

SN - 0309-0167

IS - 5

ER -