International journal of surgery case reports · 2015
Silent pelvic splenosis: Case report.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Lai Tingmin, Meng Chunfeng
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Splenosis is a benign, usually asymptomatic, condition involving autotransplantation of splenic tissue that occurs frequently after splenic rupture caused by trauma or surgery [1]. Up to 67% of the patients presenting splenic rupture may develop splenosis [2]. The interval of time between the initial trauma and the diagnosis varies from 3 to 45 years with an average interval of 21 years [3]. Since the finding of this entity is usually accidental, the real incidence is not well known. Although splenosis following traumatic splenectomy after traffic accidents is well-documented in the literature, there do not seem to be many reported cases where splenosis produced gynecological complications [4]. There were fewer than 100 cases of splenosis reported since the first report of Buchbinder and Lipkoff in 1939 [5] in the English language medical literature of which only a minority appeared in the gynecological literature.
PRESENTATION OF CASE: A case of pelvic and omentum majus splenosis in a patient is presented.
DISCUSSION: Pelvic splenosis remains a rare finding in clinical practice. In most reported cases in the literature, the diagnosis was not considered before surgery. This approach may obviate the need for invasive evaluation for a primary or secondary neoplasm, and thus unnecessary surgery, and therefore preserve probable functional splenic tissue. Our case was diagnosed using non-surgical modalities.
CONCLUSION: Our case emphasizes the rare diagnosing of pelvic splenosis in the evaluating pelvic mass with the tissue evidence instead of surgery.
PRESENTATION OF CASE: A case of pelvic and omentum majus splenosis in a patient is presented.
DISCUSSION: Pelvic splenosis remains a rare finding in clinical practice. In most reported cases in the literature, the diagnosis was not considered before surgery. This approach may obviate the need for invasive evaluation for a primary or secondary neoplasm, and thus unnecessary surgery, and therefore preserve probable functional splenic tissue. Our case was diagnosed using non-surgical modalities.
CONCLUSION: Our case emphasizes the rare diagnosing of pelvic splenosis in the evaluating pelvic mass with the tissue evidence instead of surgery.