[Pitfalls and common problems in the differential diagnosis of epithelial ovarian tumors]

Epithelial ovarian tumors may cause various diagnostic problems of practical relevance. For the distinction between cystadenomas and borderline tumors/atypically proliferative tumors, a minimum extent of 10% of the atypical epithelial proliferation has been suggested by the WHO. The micropapillary variant of serous borderline tumors is more frequently associated with invasive growth and extraovarian lesions. Extraovarian lesions of borderline tumors are relevant for prognosis and cause a higher stage; their classification is crucial. Traditionally, they were classified into noninvasive and invasive implants based on their morphology. Based on the 2014 WHO classification, invasive lesions should be designated as low-grade serous carcinomas whereas only noninvasive lesions are considered implants. The most frequent invasive growth pattern in low-grade serous carcinomas consists of haphazardly arranged tumor cell nests and small papillae in clefts, whereas mucinous and endometrioid carcinomas mainly show a confluent glandular pattern with maze-like and cribriform structures. For metastatic mucinous tumors a nodular growth pattern is characteristic; ruling them out requires clinical information including imaging and immunohistochemistry. Differential diagnosis between low-grade and high-grade serous carcinoma is based on the degree of nuclear polymorphism and mitotic count. The seromucinous tumor category replaces the endocervical subtype of mucinous tumors and resembles histologically, biologically, and on the molecular level serous and endometrioid tumors. Endometrioid tumors with fibromatous stroma need to be distinguished from tumors with Sertoli cell differentiation and well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors. For differential diagnosis of epithelial ovarian tumors, in particular carcinomas, a panel of antibodies for immunohistochemistry is very useful under consideration of histomorphology.