Malignant pheochromocytoma: pain, palpitation, perspiration and perplexities

  1. Nanditha Ananthakrishnan 1,
  2. Saravanan Sanniyasi 1 and
  3. Daniel Ravikumar 2
  1. 1 Department of General Surgery, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute, Chennai, India
  2. 2 Department of General Surgery, ESI Hospital (Ayanavaram), Chennai, India
  1. Correspondence to Nanditha Ananthakrishnan; totogiffe@gmail.com

Publication history

Accepted:26 May 2021
First published:24 Jun 2021
Online issue publication:24 Jun 2021

Case reports

Case reports are not necessarily evidence-based in the same way that the other content on BMJ Best Practice is. They should not be relied on to guide clinical practice. Please check the date of publication.

Abstract

A 60-year-old man presented with headache, giddiness, abdominal pain and palpitation. When evaluated outside for the same, the patient was diagnosed to have hypertension and started on antihypertensives for which he did not respond. ECG was suggestive of non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. The patient was subjected to a coronary angiogram, which was normal. Patient had multiple episodes of fluctuating blood pressures. CT of the abdomen showed a 7.1×5.6×8.2 cm mass in the left adrenal gland suggestive of a pheochromocytoma. Serum, urine metanephrines and normetanephrines were elevated. After discussing with the multidisciplinary team, the patient was stabilised with alpha blockers and taken up for laparoscopic left adrenalectomy. Histopathology was reported as pheochromocytoma with a Pheochromocytoma Adrenal Scaled Score of 10/20 suggestive of malignancy. This is one such case of a malignant pheochromocytoma, which was managed successfully despite the perplexities faced in stabilising the crisis followed by laparoscopic resection in a moribund patient.

Background

Pheochromocytoma is a rare disease, which is mainly sporadic but also associated with some familial disorders such as Von Hippel-Lindau syndrome, Von Recklinghausen’s disease, Sturge-Weber syndrome, Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia type 2A and 2B. The first case of pheochromocytoma was reported by Felix Frenkel in a woman who suffered from intermittent attacks of palpitation, anxiety, headaches and vertigo in 1886. Autopsy of the adrenal glands revealed brown colour on being treated with chromium salts. Hence, the name pheochromocytoma (Greek phaios, dusky coloured tumour). Malignancy accounts for only 10% of the cases approximately. They arise from the chromaffin cells of the adrenal medulla. They are also known as tumour of 10 because 10% are bilateral, 10% are malignant, 10% are extra adrenal, 10% are familial and 10% occur in paediatric population. Most pheochromocytomas produce both epinephrine and norepinephrine. Increased production of dopamine and homovanillic acid is usually seen in malignant lesions.1 People with germline succinate dehydrogenase complex subunit B mutation appear to have higher propensity for extra adrenal and malignant lesions.2 To date, there is no definitive criteria to diagnose malignant pheochromocytoma. The main treatment is surgery. Other treatment options suggested are chemotherapy and radionuclide therapy. Here, we share our experience with one such rare case alongside the challenges that we faced at each level.

Case presentation

A 60-year-old man presented to our casualty with headache, giddiness, palpitation and lower abdominal pain for 2 days. Patient was evaluated outside for the same and identified to have high blood pressure (BP), which did not settle with antihypertensive medication. ECG showed non-ST elevation myocardial infarction changes for which he underwent a coronary angiogram and it was reported to be normal. On examination, patient had flushing of his face associated with increased sweating. His pulse was 110 beats/min and BP was 160/90 mm Hg. His general systemic examination was normal.

Investigations

The routine blood investigations revealed elevated blood sugars, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine and troponin T. CT of the abdomen showed a well-defined lobulated iso-hyperdense heterogeneous mass lesion of size 7.1×5.6×8.2 cm (AP×TRANS×CC) involving the left suprarenal region with focal area of calcification, perilesional fat stranding and loss of fat plane with the left kidney (figure 1). CT of the chest showed no evidence of any other mass. Twenty-four-hour serum metanephrine, urine metanephrines and normetanephrines were sent for confirmation of the diagnosis and were reported as serum metanephrines >3600 pg/ml (normal value <65 pg/ml), urine metanephrines 3.3 mg/24 hours (normal value upto 1 mg/24 hours) and urine normetanephrines 5854.8 mcg/24 hours (normal value <600 mcg/24 hours), respectively.

Figure 1

Left adrenal lesion. (A) Coronal plain CT image showing lobulated heterogeneous mass involving left suprarenal region (red arrow). (B) Axial plain CT image of the left adrenal mass (red arrow).

Treatment

In the ward, the patient recorded a BP of 220/120 mm Hg, pulse of 120 beats/min following which he had an episode of seizure-like activity and became unconscious. In view of pheochromocytoma crisis, the patient was shifted to the intensive care unit (ICU), where he had an episode of postural hypotension recording a BP of 80/52 mm Hg (figure 2). Initially, the patient was resuscitated with fluids and inotropes for the hypotension. Once the BPs plummeted, tab prazosin 5 mg was started. The patient’s BP stabilised over 2 weeks and later he was taken up for laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Intraoperatively initially, there was severe hypertension, which was managed with nitroglycerin (0.05 mcg—5 mcg/min) infusion and boluses of diltiazem (0.25 mg/kg), metoprolol (2.5–5 mg) and esmolol (0.5–1 mg/kg). After the adrenal vein (figure 3) was clipped, there was severe hypotension, which was managed using norepinephrine infusion (0.05–0.5 mcg/kg/min).

Figure 2

Depicting the initial drop in blood pressure of 80/52 mm Hg followed by plummeting to 274/145 mm Hg (white arrows).

Figure 3

Intraoperative picture showing clipping the adrenal vein.

The specimen was sent for histopathology. The gross specimen received weighed 189 g measuring 9.5×6×2.5 cm with attached fibro fatty tissue measuring 6×3.5×2 cm (figure 4A). The cut surface was gray-brown, well circumscribed and homogeneous (figure 4B). The encapsulated lesion measured 9×6×2.5 cm with adjacent normal parenchyma measuring 0.5×0.5×0.5 cm. No capsular breech was identified. Histopathological examination was suggestive of a malignant pheochromocytoma (figure 5A–C) with a Pheochromocytoma Adrenal Scaled Score (PASS) of 10/20 (table 1).

Table 1

PASS of the patient’s specimen

PASS Score
Large nest/diffuse growth >10% of tumour volume 2
Central confluent tumour necrosis 0
High cellularity 0
Extension into adipose tissue 0
Cellular monotony 0
Tumour cell spindling 0
Mitosis >3/10 High Power Field (HPF) 2
Atypical mitosis 2
Profound nuclear pleomorphism 0
Vascular invasion 0
Capsular invasion 1
Nuclear hyperchromasia 1
Total 10
  • PASS, Pheochromocytoma Adrenal Scaled Score.

Figure 4

(A) Gross specimen of the left adrenal mass. (B) Cut surface.

Figure 5

(A–C) Section shows fairly circumscribed encapsulated lesion showing cells arranged in Zellballen pattern and focally in diffuse nests with rich vascular network. Cells are polygonal with abundant amphophillic finely granular cytoplasm. Round to oval nuclei with prominent nucleoli and mild nuclear pleomorphism, few high hyperchromatic forms. Occasional atypical mitosis, focal capsular invasion noted with extension of the lesion into adjacent cells.

Outcome and follow-up

Postoperatively, the patient was shifted to the ICU and slowly weaned off the inotropes. His surgical scars healed well by primary intension and blood pressures were stable. In view of the suggested malignancy, iodine 131 labelled metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) whole body scan was done and it showed no evidence of residual tumour. The patient is currently fine and in follow-up.

Discussion

Pheochromocytoma constitutes only 0.5% of people with hypertension and suggestive features, hence posing a diagnostic challenge. Our patient presented with symptoms of episodic spells of headaches, diaphoresis and palpitation in associatiation with marked fluctuations of BP, which was classically suggestive of pheochromocytoma. Screening for pheochromocytoma consists of plasma fractionated metanephrines followed by 24-hour urine metanephrines and catecholamines. It is important to test the patient when he/she is free of confounding factors such as drugs, major physical or psychological stressors. A new biomarker methoxytyramine is currently available, which tells us about the likelihood of malignancy.3 Patients with biochemical evidence must then undergo imaging such as MRI or CT followed by MIBG scan for identifying multifocal disease.4

The first challenge was on deciding whether to take up the patient for an emergency surgery or to stabilize and then take up electively as the patient was in pheochromocytoma crisis. There are controversies regarding the timing of surgery in patients with pheochromocytoma crisis. Articles published by Bos et al, Uchida et al and Salinas et al have argued that patients require emergency resection at the time of crisis in case of haemorrhagic shock, tumour rupture or multiorgan failure.5 , 6 7 However, few other studies have emphasised on intensive medical preoperative stabilisation prior to surgery to reduce on table complications and for favourable outcomes.8 Hypertension is initially controlled using an alpha blocker followed by a beta blocker if tachycardia is present. 9 Our patient was stabilised for a period of 2 weeks and later taken up for surgery.

Based on size and weight, whether we were dealing with a malignant tumour was the next question that came to our minds. Some studies state that it is possible to predict the malignant behaviour of pheochromocytoma based on the size and weight of the tumour.10 However, it is impossible to comment on the biological properties of the tumour just based on imaging. Currently, malignancy is described by the presence of distant metastasis, local recurrence or invasion of adjacent structures.11 The PASS designed by Thompson identifies potential malignancy in a pheochromocytoma.12 Hence, we anticipated a malignant tumour while waiting for the final histopathology report, though there were no signs of distant metastasis or local invasion of nearby structures in the scan.

The approach for surgery, open or laparoscopy was yet another important decision to be made. A study done by Kercher et al studied that despite concerns regarding cardiovascular instability following catecholamine release while creating pneumoperitoneum, laparoscopic resection of large lesions can be accomplished by experienced surgeons.13 In the current era of minimally invasive surgery, we would like to emphasise on the use of laparoscopy for management stating its advantages such as minimising trauma to the abdominal wall and the organs, faster convalescence, reduced hospital stay, faster return to normal activity, outcome, efficiency, decreased incidence of wound infections and reduced perioperative morbidity when compared with open surgery. There has been no evidence to compare the superiority of open surgery in comparison with laparoscopy in terms of oncological short-term and long-term outcomes.14

There is no clear cut regimen in the treatment of malignant pheochromocytoma. A sequential approach involving surgery, chemotherapy and radionuclide therapy is preferred today. Commonly used chemotherapeutic agents include temozolamide, cyclophosphamide, vincristine and doxorubicin. Iodine 131 labelled metaiodobenzylguanidine, yttrium-90 labelled or lutetium-177 labelled DOTATOC (DOTA0-Phe1-Tyr3 octreotide)are used to treat malignant, non-resectable or metastatic pheochromocytoma.

As per the European Society for Medical Oncology–European Reference Network for Rare Adult Solid Cancers Clinical Practice Guidelines for adrenocortical carcinomas and malignant pheochromocytomas, the first follow-up is done 2–6 weeks post surgery using serum metanephrines and thereafter depending on the risk of metastasis. In inoperable disease, patients are followed up every 3–6 months during the first year by metanephrines, imaging and then adjusted afterwards.15

Patient’s perspective

I brought my father to the casualty in view of his high blood pressures (BPs). In the emergency, I noticed his face and neck turning red. The same night in the ward he had a seizure-like activity, his eyes were fixed up and he became unconscious. Following that, he was shifted straight into the intensive care unit. I was informed that my dad has pheochromocytoma. Care plan was made by a team of doctors to stabilise his BPs prior to the procedure. After 2 weeks, he underwent a successful laparoscopic removal of the tumour. The biopsy reports were shocking as it suggested that the tumor was malignant. In order to clear our doubts regarding any residual tumor, my dad underwent metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scan, which came out clean. There was a drastic change in my dad’s BP and sugar levels following surgery. My dad is hale, healthy and is in regular follow up. Prior to this, I took my dad to five hospitals, where everybody initially treated his BPs. Only later were we educated about pheochromocytoma and malignancy in it being a gray area. According to my experience, awareness about these conditions is also necessary rather than terming it as a rare condition.

Learning points

  • Preoperative stabilisation of blood pressure is vital in the management of pheochromocytoma as it reduces on table death and improves the outcome.

  • Biochemical diagnosis should be done after eliminating the confounding factors.

  • Surgery is curative in more than 90% of pheochromocytoma cases.

  • Successful operative management requires invasive haemodynamic monitoring and meticulous fluid management.

Ethics statements

Footnotes

  • Contributors NA: drafting the manuscript. SS: primary surgeon, review of literature and final approval. DR: review of literature.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

References

Use of this content is subject to our disclaimer