Mucinous urachal adenocarcinoma: A potential nonfluorodeoxyglucose-avid pitfall on 18fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography

Jeeban Das; Hebert Vargas; Gary Ulaner

doi:10.4103/wjnm.WJNM_60_19

World Journal of Nuclear Medicine, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · World J Nucl Med 2020; 19(04): 432-434
DOI: 10.4103/wjnm.WJNM_60_19

Case Report

Mucinous urachal adenocarcinoma: A potential nonfluorodeoxyglucose-avid pitfall on ¹⁸fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography

Authors

Jeeban Das

¹Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA

²Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA
Hebert Vargas

¹Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA

²Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA
Gary Ulaner

¹Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA

²Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA

Abstract

Mucinous adenocarcinoma of the urachal remnant is a nonurothelial malignancy that may be asymptomatic until locally advanced or metastatic. We describe a 37-year-old woman with invasive ductal breast carcinoma who underwent ¹⁸Fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose (¹⁸F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) computed tomography (CT) demonstrating a non-FDG avid pelvic mass, initially suspected to represent a pedunculated uterine fibroid. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a mixed solid-cystic mass separate from the uterus, suspicious for urachal neoplasm, confirmed as mucinous adenocarcinoma on histopathology. Urachal tumors may not be FDG-avid and represent a potential pitfall on FDG PET/CT.

Keywords

¹⁸Fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose - mucinous neoplasm - positron emission tomography/computed tomography - urachal adenocarcinoma

Full Text

References

References
1 Niedworok C, Panitz M, Szarvas T, Reis H, Reis AC, Szendröi A, et al. Urachal carcinoma of the bladder: Impact of clinical and immunohistochemical parameters on prognosis. J Urol 2016;195:1690-6.
2 Ashley RA, Inman BA, Sebo TJ, Leibovich BC, Blute ML, Kwon ED, et al. Urachal carcinoma: Clinicopathologic features and long-term outcomes of an aggressive malignancy. Cancer 2006;107:712-20.
3 Dhillon J, Liang Y, Kamat AM, Siefker-Radtke A, Dinney CP, Czerniak B, et al. Urachal carcinoma: A pathologic and clinical study of 46 cases. Hum Pathol 2015;46:1808-14.
4 Yu JS, Kim KW, Lee HJ, Lee YJ, Yoon CS, Kim MJ, et al. Urachal remnant diseases: Spectrum of CT and US findings. Radiographics 2001;21:451-61.
5 Parada Villavicencio C, Adam SZ, Nikolaidis P, Yaghmai V, Miller FH. Imaging of the urachus: Anomalies, complications, and mimics. Radiographics 2016;36:2049-63.
6 Guimarães MD, Bitencourt AG, Lima EN, Marchiori E. 18FDG PET/CT findings in the unusual urachal adenocarcinoma. Clin Nucl Med 2014;39:831-4.
7 Li X, Liu S, Yao S, Wang M. A rare case of urachal mucinous adenocarcinoma detected by ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med 2015;40:282-5.
8 Yang G, Wang Z, Liu S, Wu F, Li D. A rare case of urachal carcinoma metastatic to thoracic vertebra detected by FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med 2017;42:544-6.
9 Berger KL, Nicholson SA, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA. FDG PET evaluation of mucinous neoplasms: Correlation of FDG uptake with histopathologic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:1005-8.
10 Lakhani A, Khan SR, Bharwani N, Stewart V, Rockall AG, Khan S, et al. FDG PET/CT pitfalls in gynecologic and genitourinary oncologic imaging. Radiographics 2017;37:577-94.