Giant Uterine Leiomyomatosis Mimicking Uterine Sarcoma: A Case Report

Main Article Content

Andrea Paredes Cortazar
Mitzi Fernandez Luna
Gladys Minu Ruz Sierra
Eduardo Alfredo Eduardo Santamaría Martínez

Abstract

Introduction: Uterine leiomyomas are the most common benign pelvic neoplasm in women of reproductive age. Although they are generally asymptomatic and small in size, on rare occasions they may reach giant dimensions, representing a diagnostic challenge when their clinical and imaging characteristics mimic malignancy, particularly uterine sarcoma. Case presentation: We present the case of a 39-year-old patient with progressive increase in abdominal circumference over several years. Imaging studies revealed a uterine mass measuring approximately 30 cm with areas suggestive of degeneration and mass effect on adjacent abdominal structures, raising the differential diagnosis between uterine leiomyomatosis and leiomyosarcoma. Due to suspicion of malignancy, total abdominal hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was performed without intraoperative complications and with an estimated blood loss of 200 mL. Histopathological examination confirmed the presence of conventional and degenerated uterine leiomyomas with dystrophic calcification and hyalinization, without evidence of malignancy. The patient had a favorable postoperative course. Discussion: Giant uterine leiomyomas constitute an uncommon presentation that may mimic malignant neoplasms, making preoperative diagnosis difficult. In these cases, definitive diagnosis depends on histopathological analysis. Conclusion: This case highlights that large tumor size does not necessarily imply malignancy. Timely surgical management and histopathological examination are essential to establish the definitive diagnosis and guide appropriate treatment.

Article Details

How to Cite
Andrea Paredes Cortazar, Mitzi Fernandez Luna, Gladys Minu Ruz Sierra, and Eduardo Alfredo Eduardo Santamaría Martínez. 2026. “Giant Uterine Leiomyomatosis Mimicking Uterine Sarcoma: A Case Report”. International Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Research Studies 6 (05):992-96. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmscrs/v6-i5-30.
Section
Articles

References

I. Baird, D. D., Dunson, D. B., Hill, M. C., Cousins, D., & Schectman, J. M. (2003). High cumulative incidence of uterine leiomyoma in Black and White women: Ultrasound evidence. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 188(1), 100–107. https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2003.99

II. Raffone, A., Raimondo, D., Neola, D., Travaglino, A., Giorgi, M., Lazzeri, L., De Laurentiis, F., Carravetta, C., Zupi, E., Seracchioli, R., Casadio, P., & Guida, M. (2024). Diagnostic accuracy of MRI in the differential diagnosis between uterine leiomyomas and sarcomas: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 165(1), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15136

III. Jonas, H. S., & Masterson, B. J. (1977). Giant uterine tumors: Case report and review of the literature. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 50(1 Suppl), 2S–4S.

IV. Lim, P. T., Tan, C. H., Chia, H. L., & Phoon, J. (2018). Management of a giant uterine leiomyoma. BMJ Case Reports, 2018, bcr-2017-224052. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2017-224052

V. Kalyan, S., & Sharma, S. (2018). Giant uterine leiomyoma: A case report with literature review. International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology, 7(11), 4779–4785. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20184548

VI. Mongan, S., & Wibowo, A. (2021). Giant uterine leiomyoma with surgical difficulty. Journal of Medical Cases, 12(10), 386–390. https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc3764

VII. Wiesener, V., Dhanawat, J., Andresen, K., Mathiak, M., Both, M., Alkatout, I., & Bauerschlag, D. (2021). Massive uterine fibroid: A diagnostic dilemma: A case report and review of the literature. Journal of Medical Case Reports, 15, 344. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13256-021-02959-3

VIII. Brito, L. G. O., Ueno, N. L., & Machado, M. R. (2021). Does big mean evil? Giant, but benign uterine leiomyoma: Case report and review of the literature. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, 43(1), 66–71. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1721351

Most read articles by the same author(s)