BMC surgery · 2021
Stercoral re-perforation after colostomy takedown: a case report.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lee Seunghwan, Kim Chang Woo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Stercoral perforation (SP) is a rare surgical condition that is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Most of these patients undergo emergent surgery, including colostomy, and some undergo colostomy takedown after recovery. Stercoral re-perforation after colostomy takedown followed by colostomy for SP has not yet been reported.
CASE PRESENTATION: A 79-year-old woman presented with abdominal pain for one day. Abdominal-pelvis computed tomography revealed pneumoperitoneum with diffuse mesenteric fat haziness of the left abdomen. During laparoscopic exploration, a 3-cm-sized perforated site was found at the sigmoid-descending colon, with fecal material and reactive fluid outside the colon. Loop colostomy formation was performed, and a takedown was completed after 3 months. Two years 4 months after the initial procedure, the patient was re-admitted to our hospital with abdominal pain. She underwent a second laparoscopic colostomy formation and was discharged, although the postoperative clinical course was poorer than that after the first surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: This case of stercoral re-perforation after colostomy takedown followed by colostomy formation for SP has important clinical implications and can be a reference for physicians. When the first colostomy formation was performed for SP, the decision on performance of a colostomy takedown should be made after carefully considering several factors.
CASE PRESENTATION: A 79-year-old woman presented with abdominal pain for one day. Abdominal-pelvis computed tomography revealed pneumoperitoneum with diffuse mesenteric fat haziness of the left abdomen. During laparoscopic exploration, a 3-cm-sized perforated site was found at the sigmoid-descending colon, with fecal material and reactive fluid outside the colon. Loop colostomy formation was performed, and a takedown was completed after 3 months. Two years 4 months after the initial procedure, the patient was re-admitted to our hospital with abdominal pain. She underwent a second laparoscopic colostomy formation and was discharged, although the postoperative clinical course was poorer than that after the first surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: This case of stercoral re-perforation after colostomy takedown followed by colostomy formation for SP has important clinical implications and can be a reference for physicians. When the first colostomy formation was performed for SP, the decision on performance of a colostomy takedown should be made after carefully considering several factors.