Abstract
Objective
Angiolipomas are usually found in the subcutaneous tissue of the trunk and limbs. Spinal angiolipomas (SALs) are uncommon and have rarely been reported. We report a series of nine SALs patients who received surgical treatment in our department. To summarize the clinical characteristics of SALs, propose our surgical strategies, and evaluate the effects of the operation.
Methods
This was a retrospective review of nine SALs patients who received surgical treatment from August 2015 to March 2020. Total or subtotal resection was determined by the axial localization (dorsal or ventral) and the extent of intervertebral foramen involvement. The outcomes were assessed based on the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scoring system utilized before surgery and at various follow-up points.
Angiolipomas are benign tumors composed of mature fatty tissue and abnormal vascular elements, and they are usually found in the subcutaneous tissue of the trunk and limbs [5]. Spinal angiolipomas (SALs) are uncommon in the clinic and have rarely been reported in the literature. Because of this low occurrence, reports are always case reports. In this article, we report a series of nine SALs patients to summarize their clinical characteristics and evaluate the surgical strategies and the effects of the operation.
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital (18013-0-01). This type of study does not require informed consent.
Nine patients with SALs (confirmed by final pathological results) were retrospectively reviewed at our center from August 2015 to March 2020. Those patients included four males and five females aged 12–73 years (46.6±17.9 years). The mean disease duration (history before diagnosis) was 15.1±19.1 months (range, 2–60), and the SALs locations included thoracic segments (n=5), lumbar segments (n=3), and cervical segments (n=1). Regarding the clinical symptoms, the patients’ complaints were mostly sensory disorders (numbness, paresthesia, and pain), motor deficits (limb weakness) and sphincter disturbances. None of the patients underwent invasive treatment before the operation. The patients’ general information is listed in Table 1.
Electrophysiological monitoring, including somatosensory-evoked potentials and motor-evoked potentials, was used during every operation. The operations were performed with the patient in a semiprone position and with a posterior midline incision. The vertebral laminae of the corresponding lesion segments were removed to provide adequate exposure of the tumors.
In cases with a dorsal location and those in which the intervertebral foramens were not seriously affected, total resection of the tumors and the capsule was achievable. On the other hand, if the tumors had a ventral location or if the intervertebral foramens were seriously affected, wider resection was performed.
After resection of the tumors, the laminae were replaced and fixed with plates and screws to reconstruct the stability of the spine. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy were not administered after routine surgery, even in cases of subtotal resection.
The tumors were examined by two independent experienced pathologists after the surgery.
Among the nine patients analyzed, the mJOA score was 6.6±2.3 before surgery and 10.1±1.1 at the last follow-up time point (p<0.001, t-test). Total resection (confirmed by intraoperative discovery and follow-up magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] scans) of the tumors was achieved in seven patients, and subtotal resection was achieved in two patient (No. 1 and 5). At the last follow-up time point, three patients exhibited recovery, six patients exhibited improvement, and no recurrence was observed in any patients. Some of the postoperative MRI scans are shown in Fig. 2.
According to the histological examination, the tissue was composed of mature lipocytes and abnormal blood vessels, consistent with a diagnosis of angiolipoma (Fig. 3).
Immunohistochemistry was performed in seven patients. The main results were CD31 (+), 6/7; CD34 (+), 6/7; S-100 (+), 5/7; Ki-67 (+), 4/7, <3%.
SALs were first reported by Berenbruch in 1890 [1]. In 1960, Howard and Helwig [10] described SALs as anatomopathologic entities containing vascular and mature adipose elements.
As reported in previous studies, SALs are considered benign and rare lesions of the spinal axis, and they account for 0.14–1.2% of all spinal tumors and 2–3% of epidural spinal tumors [4,12,18]. SALs occur mostly in adults aged between 40 and 60 years and have a female predominance, and the duration of disease is usually long. The most common site of SALs is the posterior epidural space at the thoracic level, and multiple segments are often involved [6,14,23,28].
The thoracic predominance of SALs was also found in our series of patients (5/9). This could be explained by the regional variation of the blood supply in the mid-thoracic spine, where the spine is least perfused. This may allow spinal lipomas to transform into SALs because of neovascularization caused by possible ischemic events [13].
We also noted some differences in our series. 1) We had a 12-year-old cervical SALs (C4–C6) patient (No. 7) with a relatively short disease duration (2 months). This situation has also been reported in other studies [7,24], but we did not find spontaneous epidural hematomas during surgery. And 2) we had a patient with infiltrating SALs (No. 1) whose tumor was located in a lumbar segment (L5) and was completely in the ventral part. This is not common and has rarely been reported before [9,16,22]. We performed subtotal resection, and the long-term effect was good.
The clinical syndromes of epidural angiolipomas are basically the same as those of other benign space-occupying spinal tumors [20]. Because of the benign nature of angiolipomas and with the prolongation of the disease course, patients may gradually develop sensory disorders, weakness in the lower limbs and sphincter dysfunction.
Sudden deterioration of neurological symptoms can occur due to intratumoral hemorrhage or thrombosis [11,19,27,30]. Patient No. 6 in our group experienced sudden aggravated radicular pain due to hemorrhagic SALs after receiving a back massage. The sudden intratumoral hemorrhage was confirmed by changes in imaging data and actual conditions during surgery. Additionally, these sudden deteriorating phenomena can occur during pregnancy and with a history of weight gain in obese patients, as reported elsewhere [8,17,26,27], probably because of hormonal changes and an increase in the fatty component of the tumor.
Lin and Lin [15] categorized SALs into noninfiltrating and infiltrating in 1974. MRI is the standard diagnostic tool for SALs. The fat content appears hyperintense on T1- and T2-weighted images, has a weakened signal due to fat suppression, and has no enhancement performance, while the vascular component appears isointense on T1-weighted images and hyperintense on T2-weighted images, is not weakened due to fat suppression and is strongly enhanced after the injection of contrast medium. Because SALs are composite tumors composed of mature fat tissue and proliferated vasculature, their appearance on MRI is often protean [11]. Computed tomography scanning is helpful for evaluating the degree of bone destruction when the tumor infiltrates the vertebral body. Differential diagnoses include extradural lipomatosis, nerve sheath tumor, meningioma, metastasis, and malignant lymphoma.
Si et al. [24] proposed a new and impressive classification of SALs. According to their classification strategy, subtype IB SALs usually have lipomatosis in their upper and/or lower segments. In our patients, the MRI manifestations were consistent with those reported in most studies, but we did not observe any cases of lipomatosis in the upper and/or lower segments of the tumors, even in overweight patients. This could be because we had a limited number of cases.
Histologically, SALs are tumors composed of mature lipocytes and proliferating abnormal vessels, including capillary, sinusoidal, venous or arterial vascular elements. The ratio of fat to vessels is variable, ranging from 1 : 3 to 2 : 3 [15,21,29]. Immunohistochemical assays were performed in seven of our nine patients, and we observed positive staining for CD31, CD34, and S-100 and a low proliferation rate of Ki-67. The results were in agreement with those reported in the literature [6,24,25]. A diagnosis of SALs should be based on a combination of clinical, radiological and pathological examination findings.
The extent of resection for infiltrative SALs has always been a topic of debate. Because patients’ symptoms are caused by tumors in the spinal canal, surgeons generally do not deal with the affected vertebral bodies. Therefore, infiltration does not determine the choice of surgical procedure. In our opinion, the axial localization (dorsal or ventral) and the extent of intervertebral foramen involvement are the factors that should determine the surgical plan.
Most cases in which tumors are located dorsally and those in which the intervertebral foramens are not seriously affected can be totally resected. In such cases, we usually found that the tumors were compressive epidural fatty tissue intermingled with vascular structures that bled easily. Total resection was relatively easy to achieve without dura injury because adhesions between the tumors and the dura were limited.
However, if tumors are located ventrally, if the intervertebral foramens are seriously affected, or if the thoracic cavity is involved, wider resection should be planned. The extent of laminectomy should be appropriately expanded, especially on the symptomatic side. Additionally, according to Si et al. [24], the sternocostal joint might need to be removed in some cases. In these cases, surgeons can cut the tumors into pieces and remove them in a piecemeal fashion rather than in an intralesional fashion. For the cases whose facet joint were partially removed, and the cases whose sternocostal joint need to be removed, appropriate internal fixation is recommended to ensure spinal stability. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy are not recommended for these cases of subtotal resection.
According to the literature, most SALs patients have a good prognosis, even in cases of subtotal resection [3,24,29]. According to the largest single center report, 21 cases of SALs had a good prognosis and no recurrence with a follow up of approximately 10 years [24]. As to Wang et al. [29], case series (12 cases of SALs), two cases of infiltrating SALs with subtotal resection had no recurrence with a mean follow-up of 40 months. The recurrence of SALs after surgery is rare, and only two cases were reported : one after gross-total removal [2] and one infiltrating tumor following subtotal resection [12]. According to literature, the first case recurred 12 years after surgery [2]. A comparison with the published single center report on treatment and outcomes of SALs is listed in Table 2.
In our group, six cases (including two infiltrating SALs) achieved improved outcome rather than recovered. It may be related to the nerve root invasion by the tumor, the duration of symptoms and the timing of surgery. As to recurrence, all seven patients who underwent total tumor resection had good prognoses with a mean follow-up of 30.6 months, and there was no recurrence. The patient who underwent subtotal resection (patient No. 1) exhibited an improved outcome 54 months after the surgery, which was a relatively long follow-up period, with no obvious signs of recurrence. From our point of view, early surgical resection is recommended because of the improvement or recovery of symptoms after surgery and the extremely low recurrence rate.
SALs are rare but well-defined benign tumors. In addition to clinical characteristics and radiological manifestations, the diagnosis of SALs depends strongly on pathological findings. Early surgical resection is recommended, and the specific procedures used should be determined by the axial localization (dorsal or ventral) and the extent of intervertebral foramen involvement. Most patients have a good prognosis, even in cases of subtotal resection.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by the Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital Fund (Grant No. 12017C1026).
References
1. Anson JA, Cybulski GR, Reyes M. Spinal extradural angiolipoma: a report of two cases and review of the literature. Surg Neurol. 34:173–178. 1990.
2. Bender JL, Van Landingham JH, Manno NJ. Epidural lipoma producing spinal cord compression. Report of two cases. J Neurosurg. 41:100–103. 1974.
3. Bouali S, Maatar N, Bouhoula A, Abderrahmen K, Said IB, Boubaker A, et al. Spinal epidural angiolipomas: clinical characteristics, management and outcomes. Asian J Neurosurg. 11:348–351. 2016.
4. Fourney DR, Tong KA, Macaulay RJ, Griebel RW. Spinal angiolipoma. Can J Neurol Sci. 28:82–88. 2001.
5. Garg A, Gupta V, Gaikwad S, Deol P, Mishra NK, Sharma MC, et al. Spinal angiolipoma: report of three cases and review of MRI features. Australas Radiol. 46:84–90. 2002.
6. Gelabert-González M, García-Allut A. Spinal extradural angiolipoma: report of two cases and review of the literature. Eur Spine J. 18:324–335. 2009.
7. Groen RJ. Non-operative treatment of spontaneous spinal epidural hematomas: a review of the literature and a comparison with operative cases. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 146:103–110. 2004.
8. Guegan Y, Fardoun R, Launois B, Pecker J. Spinal cord compression by extradural fat after prolonged corticosteroid therapy. J Neurosurg. 56:267–269. 1982.
9. Han SR, Yee GT, Choi CY, Lee CH. Infiltrating spinal angiolipoma. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 52:161–163. 2012.
11. Hu S, Hu CH, Hu XY, Wang XM, Dai H, Fang XM, et al. MRI features of spinal epidural angiolipomas. Korean J Radiol. 14:810–817. 2013.
12. Kujas M, Lopes M, Lalam TF, Fohanno D, Poirier J. Infiltrating extradural spinal angiolipoma. Clin Neuropathol. 18:93–98. 1999.
13. Labram EK, el-Shunnar K, Hilton DA, Robertson NJ. Revisited: spinal angiolipoma--three additional cases. Br J Neurosurg. 13:25–9. 1999.
14. Leu NH, Chen CY, Shy CG, Lu CY, Wu CS, Chen DC, et al. MR imaging of an infiltrating spinal epidural angiolipoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 24:1008–1011. 2003.
15. Lin JJ, Lin F. Two entities in angiolipoma. A study of 459 cases of lipoma with review of literature on infiltrating angiolipoma. Cancer. 34:720–727. 1974.
16. Nadi MM, Nadi AM, Zabara MY, Ahmad TM. Management of infiltrating spinal epidural angiolipoma. Neurosciences (Riyadh). 20:159–163. 2015.
17. O’Donovan NA, Naik K, Maloney WJ, Llewellyn CG. Spinal angiolipoma mimicking extradural lipomatosis. Can Assoc Radiol J. 47:51–53. 1996.
18. Pagni CA, Canavero S. Spinal epidural angiolipoma: rare or unreported? Neurosurgery. 31:758–764. discussion 764. 1992.
19. Preul MC, Leblanc R, Tampieri D, Robitaille Y, Pokrupa R. Spinal angiolipomas. Report of three cases. J Neurosurg. 78:280–286. 1993.
20. Provenzale JM, McLendon RE. Spinal angiolipomas: MR features. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 17:713–719. 1996.
21. Reyes D, Candocia FJ. Thoracolumbar spinal angiolipoma demonstrating high signal on STIR imaging: a case report and review of the literature. Spine J. 13:e1–e5. 2013.
22. Rocchi G, Caroli E, Frati A, Cimatti M, Savlati M. Lumbar spinal angiolipomas: report of two cases and review of the literature. Spinal Cord. 42:313–316. 2004.
23. Samdani AF, Garonzik IM, Jallo G, Eberhart CG, Zahos P. Spinal angiolipoma: case report and review of the literature. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 146:299–302. discussion 302. 2004.
24. Si Y, Wang Z, Pan Y, Lin G, Yu T. Spinal angiolipoma: etiology, imaging findings, classification, treatment, and prognosis. Eur Spine J. 23:417–425. 2014.
25. Sim K, Tsui A, Paldor I, Kaye AH, Gaillard F. Four cases of spinal epidural angiolipoma. J Clin Neurosci. 25:134–139. 2016.
26. Trabulo A, Cerqueira L, Monteiro J, Roque P, Reis FC, Coelho MR. Spinal angiolipomas revisited: two case reports. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 138:1311–1319. 1996.
27. Tsutsumi S, Nonaka Y, Abe Y, Yasumoto Y, Ito M. Spinal angiolipoma in a pregnant woman presenting with acute epidural hemorrhage. J Clin Neurosci. 18:849–851. 2011.
28. Turgut M. Spinal angiolipomas: report of a case and review of the cases published since the discovery of the tumour in 1890. Br J Neurosurg. 13:30–40. 1999.
Table 1.
Table 2.
Study | N | Age (years) | Duration (months) | Resection | Radiotherapy | Evolution | Complications | Recurrence | Follow-up time | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wang et al. [29] (2014) | ||||||||||
Infiltrating | 2 | 50.0±5.7 | 17.5±5.0 | 2 sub-total resection | No | 1 recovery, 1 improve. | No | No | 40 months | |
Noninfiltrating | 10 | 47.6±5.5 | 16.4±8.3 | 10 total resection | No | 5 recovery, 5 improve. | No | No | From 3 to 192 months | |
Bouali et al. [3] (2016) | ||||||||||
Infiltrating | 0 | |||||||||
Noninfiltrating | 9 | 51.1±11.8 | 10.9±7.9 | 9 total removal | No | 9 recovery | No | No | NA | |
Si et al. [24] (2014) | ||||||||||
Infiltrating | 3 | 56.7±8.4 | 126.7±202.2 | 3 total removal | No | Recovery rate : from 75% to 100% | No | No | Approximately 10 years | |
Noninfiltrating | 18 | 51.6±14.2 | 15.6±14.2 | 18 total removal | No | Recovery rate : from 50% to 100% | No | No | ||
This study | ||||||||||
Infiltrating | 2 | 51.5±21.9 | 18.0±8.5 | 2 sub-total resection | No | 2 improve | No | No | 33 and 54 months | |
Noninfiltrating | 7 | 48.6±12.5 | 14.3±21.6 | 7 total resection | No | 3 recovery, 4 improve | No | No | From 21 to 50 months |