Medicine · 2022
Conservative treatment of gastric perforation after microwave ablation of a hepatocellular carcinoma: Case report.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Roller J, Zimmer V, Bücker A, Glanemann M, Eisele R M
Аннотация
RATIONALE: Microwave ablation (MWA) has been proven to be an efficient and safe method for local tumor control of liver tumors. Reported complications are rare, but include liver abscess, hematoma, pleural effusion, and occasional thermal injury of the adjacent colon. Intestinal perforation usually requires immediate surgical treatment to prevent generalized peritonitis and sepsis.
PATIENT CONCERNS AND DIAGNOSIS: Herein, we describe a case of gastric perforation following percutaneous MWA for hepatocellular carcinoma as a bridging therapy prior to liver transplantation.
INTERVENTIONS: Due to the clinical condition of the patient, conservative treatment was considered sufficient. Nine months after MWA, successful liver transplantation followed. Intraoperative findings revealed a scar in the gastric wall with tight adhesions to the liver, requiring adhesiolysis and subsequent suturing. Postoperative recovery was uneventful.
OUTCOME: At present, the patient is doing well. No further gastrointestinal events occurred.
LESSON: To our knowledge, this is the first report of such a complication occurring after MWA. Moreover, in this case, the gastric perforation could be treated conservatively.
PATIENT CONCERNS AND DIAGNOSIS: Herein, we describe a case of gastric perforation following percutaneous MWA for hepatocellular carcinoma as a bridging therapy prior to liver transplantation.
INTERVENTIONS: Due to the clinical condition of the patient, conservative treatment was considered sufficient. Nine months after MWA, successful liver transplantation followed. Intraoperative findings revealed a scar in the gastric wall with tight adhesions to the liver, requiring adhesiolysis and subsequent suturing. Postoperative recovery was uneventful.
OUTCOME: At present, the patient is doing well. No further gastrointestinal events occurred.
LESSON: To our knowledge, this is the first report of such a complication occurring after MWA. Moreover, in this case, the gastric perforation could be treated conservatively.