article · International Journal of Surgery Case Reports
Introduction and importance: Adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix (ASCC) is a rare, aggressive histological variant representing 1.8% to 5% of cervical malignancies. It is generally associated with a poorer prognosis than squamous cell carcinoma. In resource-limited settings, systemic barriers often preclude standardized multimodal management, necessitating management decisions shaped by limited resources. This case is presented following the SCARE criteria. Case presentation: A 64-year-old multiparous female presented to a tertiary hospital in Uganda with a multi-month history of dyspareunia and post-coital bleeding. Physical examination revealed an ulcerated cervical lesion; however, HPV DNA screening was unavailable. The patient underwent a total abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Histopathology revealed a 3.0 cm mass with dual squamous and glandular differentiation, staged as pT1b1 Nx Mx according to the AJCC eighth edition. Due to a lack of equipment, radical lymphadenectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy were not performed. A 5-year surveillance plan was proposed for postoperative follow-up. Clinical discussion: This case highlights the gap between basic care and enhanced international standards for cervical malignancies in women. The Nx status reflects incomplete nodal staging in a resource-limited setting. Lack of equipment limited the ability to provide appropriate, screening-based surgical management, making prospective postoperative surveillance necessary. Conclusion: ASCC necessitates early detection and standardized multimodal care, objectives that are frequently precluded by infrastructure constraints in Sub-Saharan Africa. Improving outcomes for such aggressive histologies requires a concerted global effort to expand access to HPV vaccination, DNA-based screening, and equitable radiotherapy infrastructure. This may improve the likelihood of curative treatment in resource-constrained environments.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1097/rc9.0000000000000895
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.