Primary Mesenteric Fibromatosis: A Case Report with Brief Review of Literature

Abstract

Although fibromatosis of the mesentery is a very rare locally aggressive benign condition, the uncertain treatment modalities, the natural history of the disease, and the other common differential diagnosis of the condition along with inexperience of the general clinicians with this disease pose a challenge to the professionals. The prolonged periods of stability and even regression in size of the tumor offer a hope for treatment. Accounting for 0.03 % of all neoplasms, it is also known as deep fibromatosis and desmoid tumor. Here, we discuss one case of primary mesenteric fibromatosis in a young male patient who presented to us with chronic abdominal pain after he was treated for acid peptic disease for the same at a local hospital. This case shows how management of this disease can be delayed due to unfamiliarity among clinicians of this condition. In our patient, a palliative surgical management plan was undertaken due to symptomatic mass in the abdomen, owing to unresectability.

Successful treatment of giant mesenteric fibromatosis with surgery and tamoxifen: case report

“…Abdominal ultrasonography can be performed under dynamic conditions, and can accurately indicate the intestinal wall, mesentery, and abdominal wall; Puncture biopsy with ultrasound-guided is inexpensive and feasible. Comprehensive consideration of multiple auxiliary examinations for each potentially diagnosed patients could improve the accuracy of the diagnosis ( 13 ). Pathological examination is the gold standard for MF diagnosis, and always reveals certain common features such as lumps of hard texture, rough parts, and gray and braided structure.…”

Mesenteric fibromatosis misdiagnosed with lymph node metastasis after successful laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a report of two cases with review of literature

“…Differential diagnoses include GIST, lymphoma, inflammatory fibroid polyp, fibrosarcoma, and carcinoid tumor. 16 – 18 Immunohistochemistry is an effective method to help confirm the diagnosis. In these cases, distinction between GIST and MF should be done based on the results of CD34, β-catenin, DOG1, and KIT.…”

“…In these cases, distinction between GIST and MF should be done based on the results of CD34, β-catenin, DOG1, and KIT. 16 …”