MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.ijscr.2015.07.017

Медицинская библиотека · International journal of surgery case reports · 2015

The dilemma of stump appendicitis - A case report and literature review.

Hendahewa Rasika, Shekhar Ashvini, Ratnayake Sujith

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

INTRODUCTION

Stump appendicitis is one of the rare delayed complications post appendectomy with a reported incidence of 1 in 50,000 cases. Stump appendicitis can present as a diagnostic dilemma if the treating clinician is unfamiliar with this rare clinical entity. A PubMed search was conducted to identify cases of stump appendicitis following appendectomy. Sixty one cases of SA that were reported in English medical literature were analyzed.

PRESENTATION OF CASE: We report a case of stump appendicitis (SA) with a systematic review and challenges encountered during the management.

DISCUSSION: The interval from original appendectomy to stump appendicitis ranged from 4 days to 50 years. SA followed appendectomy in 58% of open and 31.6% of laparoscopic procedures. SA was frequently misdiagnosed as constipation, gastroenteritis or right sided diverticulitis, therefore leading to a significant delay to surgery. Computerized Tomography diagnosed SA in 56.3% of cases. Perforation with gangrene of the stump occurred in 60%.

CONCLUSION

Stump appendicitis can represent a diagnostic dilemma if the treating physician is unfamiliar with this uncommon clinical entity. Radiological imaging is required to aid diagnosis and a completion appendectomy is the modality of treatment.

Для цитирования: Hendahewa Rasika, Shekhar Ashvini, Ratnayake Sujith. The dilemma of stump appendicitis - A case report and literature review.. International journal of surgery case reports. 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2015.07.017.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.