RESUMO
SUMMARY: Endometriosis, defined as the presence of endometrial glands and stroma outside the uterine cavity, is a chronic inflammatory condition that affects between 8 % and 44 % of women of reproductive age. Occasionally it presents as a sensitive mass in the abdominal wall, in relation to a surgical scar. On the other hand, in the most severe stage of endometriosis, intestinal involvement is common, and endometriotic disease of the appendix may be present even in appendices with macroscopically normal appearance. Simultaneous affectation of both locations is very rare. Nevertheless, treatment of choice is the excision of both lesions with safety margins. The aim of this manuscript was to report a case of simultaneous deep endometriosis affecting the total abdominal wall and vermiform appendix, resected in a single surgical procedure, which subsequently required abdominal wall repair with mesh plasty. Since desmoid tumors and endometriosis share similar clinical signs and unspecific imaging exams, both options should be considered in case of abdominal wall mass in female patients of childbearing age, especially if they have a history of uterine-related surgery.
La endometriosis se define como la presencia de glándulas endometriales y estroma fuera del útero. Es una afección crónica que afecta entre el 8 % y el 44 % de las mujeres en edad reproductiva. Ocasionalmente se presenta como una masa sensible en la pared abdominal, en relación con una cicatriz quirúrgica. Por otro lado, en su estadio más grave de la endometriosis, la afectación intestinal es común y puede afectar al apéndice, pudiendo estar presente incluso en apéndices de apariencia macroscópicamente normal. La afectación de ambas localizaciones simultáneamente es muy infrecuente. Sin embargo, el tratamiento de ambas lesiones es su exéresis quirúrgica con márgenes de seguridad. El objetivo de este manuscrito fue reportar un caso de endometriosis profunda simultánea que afectaba la pared abdominal total y el apéndice vermiforme, las que fueron resecadas en un solo tiempo quirúrgico, incluyendo posteriormente reparación de la pared abdominal con uso de malla. Dado que los tumores desmoides y la endometriosis comparten signos clínicos similares y exámenes de imágenes inespecíficos, se deben considerar ambas opciones en caso de masas en la pared abdominal de mujeres en edad fértil, especialmente si tienen antecedentes de cirugía relacionada con el útero.
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Adulto , Parede Abdominal/cirurgia , Endometriose/cirurgia , Endometriose/patologia , Apêndice/cirurgia , Apêndice/patologia , Telas Cirúrgicas , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Parede Abdominal/patologia , Endometriose/diagnóstico por imagemRESUMO
Objective: To evaluate the association between clinical and imaging with surgical and pathological findings in patients with suspected neuroendocrine tumor of appendix and/or appendix endometriosis. Methods: Retrospective descriptive study conducted at the Teaching and Research Institute of Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, in which medical records and databases of patients with suspected neuroendocrine tumor of appendix and/or endometriosis of appendix were analyzed by imaging. Results: Twenty-eight patients were included, all of which had some type of appendix alteration on the ultrasound examination. The pathological outcome of the appendix found 25 (89.3%) lesions compatible with endometriosis and three (10.7%) neuroendocrine tumors. The clinical findings of imaging and surgery were compared with the result of pathological anatomy by means of relative frequency. Conclusion: It was possible to observe a higher prevalence of appendix endometriosis when the patient presented more intense pain symptoms. The image observed on ultrasound obtained a high positive predictive value for appendicular endometriosis.
Assuntos
Apêndice , Endometriose , Tumores Neuroendócrinos , Ultrassonografia , Humanos , Feminino , Endometriose/diagnóstico por imagem , Estudos Retrospectivos , Adulto , Tumores Neuroendócrinos/diagnóstico por imagem , Apêndice/diagnóstico por imagem , Apêndice/patologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Adulto Jovem , Neoplasias do Apêndice/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias do Apêndice/patologia , Doenças do Ceco/diagnóstico por imagemRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted imaging compared to non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging in the differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients. METHODS: A total of 72 pregnant patients with the suspicion of acute appendicitis who underwent magnetic resonance imaging combined with diffusion-weighted imaging examinations were enrolled in this retrospective study. Magnetic resonance imaging images (non-contrast and diffusion-weighted imaging sequences) were evaluated. Moreover, apparent diffusion coefficient ratios were estimated. The diagnostic performances of magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging findings were statistically analyzed on the basis of surgical and follow-up results. RESULTS: Of 72 pregnant patients, 10 (14%) had acute appendicitis on magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging. Among 10 patients with acute appendicitis, three (3/10) had perforation. diffusion-weighted imaging findings had higher sensitivity (90 versus 60%), negative predictive value (98.41 versus 93.94%), and accuracy (98.61 versus 94.44%) ratios compared to non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. There was one false-negative result on diffusion-weighted imaging. Diffusion restriction facilitated the detection of appendicitis. The apparent diffusion coefficient ratios were lower in acute appendicitis than in the normal appendix (0.70±0.19 versus 0.96±0.16) (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: With a shorter scan time and higher diagnostic accuracy, diffusion-weighted imaging can be useful for the early diagnosis of acute appendicitis and for planning appropriate management.
Assuntos
Apendicite , Apêndice , Feminino , Gravidez , Humanos , Apendicite/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Apêndice/patologia , Doença Aguda , Diagnóstico DiferencialRESUMO
Resumen Objetivo: Reportar el caso de una paciente con intususcepción apendicular (IA), condición infrecuente, secundario a foco de endometriosis, patología que en los últimos años ha presentado un aumento en su incidencia. Material y Método: Historia clínica, imágenes preoperatorias e intraoperatorias obtenidas de la ficha clínica. Resultados: Mujer de 35 años con dolor abdominal crónico de 4 meses de evolución. Se realiza estudio colonoscópico evidenciando lesión de 15 x 8 mm en ostium apendicular intususceptada al lumen cecal, y enteroclisis por tomografía axial computarizada (TC) que confirma IA. Se realiza una resección ileocecal laparoscópica demostrando la invaginación del apéndice con biopsia que muestra un foco de endometrioma. Discusión: La IA es una condición infrecuente con una incidencia cercana al 0,01% en la población general. Las patologías benignas son la principal causa (77%), siendo la endometriosis la causa más frecuente. Conclusión: La IA por endometriosis es anecdótica, con sintomatología poco específica. Los estudios disponibles pueden orientar adecuadamente la presencia de IA, sin embargo, en algunas ocasiones puede confundirse con patologías neoplásicas, donde cobra importancia la cirugía para dilucidar la etiología.
Objective: To report the case of a patient with appendicular intussusception (AI), an infrequent condition secondary to a focus of endometriosis, a pathology that has increased incidence in recent years. Material and Method: Clinical case, history and images obtained from the clinical file and intraoperative records with the consent of the patient. Results: A 35-year-old woman with abdominal pain. Colonoscopy study showing a 15 × 8 mm lesion in the appendicular ostium intussuscepted to the cecal lumen, and a computerized tomography (CT) enteroclysis confirming AI. A laparoscopic ileocecal resection is performed, demonstrating invagination of the appendix secondary to an endometrioma focus. Discussion: AI is a rare condition, with an incidence close to 0.01% in the general population. Benign pathologies are the main cause (77%), endometriosis being the most frequent cause. Conclusion: AI due to endometriosis is anecdotal, with unspecific symptoms. The available studies can adequately guide the presence of AI, however, on some occasions it can be confused with neoplastic pathologies, where surgery is important to elucidate the etiology.
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Adulto , Apêndice/patologia , Doenças do Ceco/etiologia , Endometriose/complicações , Intussuscepção/etiologia , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X , Doenças do Ceco/diagnóstico , Colonoscopia , Endometriose/diagnóstico , Intussuscepção/diagnósticoRESUMO
Dar a conocer una presentación inusual de una patología frecuente. Se presenta caso de paciente masculino de 27 años con cuadro clínico de apendicitis aguda. Se realiza apendicetomía abierta en la cual se identifican dos apéndices vermiformes. Se confirma el diagnóstico por medio de anatomía patología, una con apendicitis aguda perforada y otra con peri-apendicitis. Es importante el conocimiento de esta patología para que se pueda reconocer y evitar errores de juicio durante el procedimiento quirúrgico y futuras complicaciones para el paciente. (AU)
Report an unusual presentation of a common pathology. A case of a 27-year-old male with a clinical picture of acute appendicitis is presented. An open appendectomy is performed in which two vermiform appendages are identified. The diagnosis is confirmed by pathology, one with perforated acute appendicitis and the other with peri-appendicitis. Knowledge of this pathology is important so that errors of judgment can be recognized and avoided during the surgical procedure and future complications for the patient. (AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Apendicectomia/classificação , Apendicite/complicações , Apêndice/patologia , Peritonite/complicaçõesAssuntos
Apêndice , Pólipos , Abscesso/patologia , Apêndice/patologia , Humanos , Pólipos/diagnóstico , Pólipos/patologiaAssuntos
Apêndice , Adolescente , Apendicite , Apêndice/anormalidades , Apêndice/patologia , Apêndice/cirurgia , Humanos , MasculinoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Despite clinical characteristics and complementary exams indicate acute appendicitis, 15% to 40% of all appendectomies result in removal of appendices with normal macro- and micromorphological aspects. Even so, manifestations of acute abdomen disappear immediately after the appendectomy, and never show back again. OBJECTIVE: To assess changes of neuroimmunoendocrine peptides on removed appendices due to clinical presentation of acute appendicitis. METHOD: This article presents an updated revision of acute appendicitis, based on references found on PUBMED, LILACS, MEDLINE, WHOLIS and SciELO, using key words "acute appendicitis", "neuroimmune appendicitis", "neurogenic appendicopathy", and "incidental appendectomy". RESULTS: Fourteen neuropeptides were analyzed by different authors who suggested the presence of neurogenic appendicopathy in morphologically normal appendices removed from patients with clinical presentation suggesting acute appendicitis. CONCLUSION: The etiopathogeny of acute appendicitis continues to be unknown, and there is a great possibility that patients with morphologically normal appendices with clinical presentation of acute appendicitis that heal after appendectomy present a neuroimmunoendocrine disease.
Assuntos
Apendicectomia , Apendicite/patologia , Apêndice/patologia , Neuropeptídeos/análise , Doença Aguda , Adolescente , Adulto , Apendicite/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Período Pós-Operatório , Período Pré-Operatório , Adulto JovemRESUMO
ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate how symptoms vary according to the appendiceal position in pediatric patients and to demonstrate that the laparoscopic approach is safe and effective in any appendiceal location by comparing each location to another. Methods: The medical records of 1,736 children aged 14 or younger who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy over a period of 14 years were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided according to the position of the appendiceal tip into four groups: anterior, pelvic, retrocecal and subhepatic. The Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests were used with the Bonferroni correction, with a significant p<0.05. Results: The appendiceal location was anterior in 1,366 cases, retrocecal in 248 cases, pelvic in 66 cases and subhepatic in 56 cases. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of patient age and gender. Abdominal pain was the only symptom with statistically significant differences between the groups. The rate of perforated appendicitis was higher in the subhepatic and pelvic positions. Intraoperative complications and conversions were not statistically significant. Technical difficulties and operative time were higher in subhepatic position. The rate of postoperative complications was similar between the different locations, except for bowel obstruction, which was higher in pelvic appendicitis. Conclusions: The clinical symptoms of appendicitis hardly ever change with the position of the appendix. The laparoscopic approach is safe and effective, regardless the appendiceal location.
RESUMO Objetivo: Investigar como os sintomas variam de acordo com a posição do apêndice em pacientes pediátricos e demonstrar que a laparoscopia é segura e eficaz em qualquer posição do apêndice, comparando-as. Métodos: Os prontuários de 1.736 pacientes pediátricos com idade ≤14 anos submetidos à apendicectomia laparoscópica em um período de 14 anos foram analisados retrospectivamente. Os pacientes foram divididos de acordo com a posição do apêndice: anterior, pélvica, retrocecal e sub-hepático. Os testes de Kruskal-Wallis e do qui-quadrado foram usados com a correção de Bonferroni, sendo significante p<0,05. Resultados: A posição do apêndice era anterior em 1.366 casos, retrocecal em 248 casos, pélvica em 66 casos e sub-hepática em 56 casos. Não houve diferenças significativas entre os grupos quanto às variáveis idade e sexo. A dor abdominal foi a única variável com diferenças estatisticamente significantes entre os grupos. A taxa de apêndice perfurado foi superior nas posições sub-hepática e pélvica. As complicações intraoperatórias e a taxa de conversão não foram estatisticamente significativas. As dificuldades técnicas e o tempo cirúrgico foram superiores em posição sub-hepática. A taxa de complicações pós-operatórias foi semelhante entre as diferentes posições, exceto a obstrução intestinal, que foi superior em posição pélvica. Conclusões: Os sintomas da apendicite dificilmente variam com a posição do apêndice. A laparoscopia é segura e eficaz, independentemente da posição do apêndice.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Criança , Adolescente , Apendicite/cirurgia , Apêndice/patologia , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Apendicectomia/efeitos adversos , Apendicectomia/métodos , Apendicectomia/estatística & dados numéricos , Apendicite/diagnóstico , Apendicite/fisiopatologia , Apendicite/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Espanha/epidemiologia , Dor Abdominal/diagnóstico , Dor Abdominal/etiologia , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Laparoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Duração da Cirurgia , Complicações Intraoperatórias/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To investigate how symptoms vary according to the appendiceal position in pediatric patients and to demonstrate that the laparoscopic approach is safe and effective in any appendiceal location by comparing each location to another. METHODS: The medical records of 1,736 children aged 14 or younger who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy over a period of 14 years were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided according to the position of the appendiceal tip into four groups: anterior, pelvic, retrocecal and subhepatic. The Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests were used with the Bonferroni correction, with a significant p<0.05. RESULTS: The appendiceal location was anterior in 1,366 cases, retrocecal in 248 cases, pelvic in 66 cases and subhepatic in 56 cases. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of patient age and gender. Abdominal pain was the only symptom with statistically significant differences between the groups. The rate of perforated appendicitis was higher in the subhepatic and pelvic positions. Intraoperative complications and conversions were not statistically significant. Technical difficulties and operative time were higher in subhepatic position. The rate of postoperative complications was similar between the different locations, except for bowel obstruction, which was higher in pelvic appendicitis. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical symptoms of appendicitis hardly ever change with the position of the appendix. The laparoscopic approach is safe and effective, regardless the appendiceal location.