Radiological evidence of subcutaneous emphysema leading to a diagnosis of retroperitoneal perforated diverticulum
| Autor: | Antony Pittathankal, Christopher Jones, Vernon Sivarajah |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2013 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Perforation business.industry Perforation (oil well) Perforated diverticulum Retroperitoneal Diverticulitis medicine.disease Article Surgery Sepsis Abdominal wall medicine.anatomical_structure Radiological weapon Surgical emphysema medicine Presentation (obstetrics) medicine.symptom business Subcutaneous emphysema |
| Zdroj: | International Journal of Surgery Case Reports. 4(6):531-533 |
| ISSN: | 2210-2612 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.ijscr.2013.01.031 |
| Popis: | INTRODUCTIONThis case report outlines the investigation and management of a young patient presenting with left iliac fossa pain and sepsis. A CT was performed which was initially reported as not showing a perforation, however closer analysis provided evidence of subcutaneous emphysema in the anterior abdominal wall. This evidence justified urgent operative intervention. We review the evidence with regard to this presentation.PRESENTATION OF CASEA previously fit 24-year-old male presented with left iliac fossa pain and features of sepsis. A CT provided subtle but distinctive evidence of retroperitoneal perforation secondary to diverticulitis, in the form of surgical emphysema in the anterior abdominal wall. In view of this, urgent operation was considered justified on suspicion of visceral perforation. A diverticular perforation was confirmed intra-operatively, and a sigmoid colectomy with primary anastomosis was performed, together with a covering ileostomy. The patient made a good post-operative recovery.DISCUSSIONDiverticular disease and its complications are becoming more common in a younger age group, in whom perforation may present late or may not be suspected. In this context special attention must be paid to any radiological evidence of perforation.CONCLUSIONSurgical emphysema in the abdominal wall is an indicator of retroperitoneal perforation, and its presence should be excluded before the possibility of perforation is dismissed. This may be of especial value in younger age groups amongst whom perforation may be less clinically obvious. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|