Amyand's hernia with concurrent appendicitis: A case of interval laparoscopic herniorrhaphy and literature review.

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Amyand's hernia with concurrent appendicitis is rare, with a reported incidence of 0.13 % of all inguinal hernias. This condition is challenging to diagnose and manage and no optimal treatment has been established. CASE PRESENTATION: A 71-year-old man presented with an acutely painful, tender, and irreducible right inguinal hernia. He had a history of a right inguinal hernia for several months and had undergone open left inguinal hernia repair. The patient had no other medical comorbidities. Blood test results were nonspecific, with a C-reactive protein of 90 mg/L. Ultrasound scan suggested a strangulated right inguinal hernia. Laparoscopy revealed an Amyand's hernia with concurrent appendicitis and a pus-filled right inguinal hernia sac. The patient underwent laparoscopic appendicectomy, followed by staged laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal right inguinal hernia repair with mesh after eight weeks to reduce mesh infection. Histopathological examination confirmed acute uncomplicated appendicitis without perforation or malignancy. The patient had an unremarkable post-operative recovery. DISCUSSION: This case highlights the diagnostic challenges associated with Amyand's hernia and concurrent appendicitis. Laparoscopy provides both diagnostic and therapeutic opportunities. In this case, laparoscopic mesh herniorrhaphy was delayed and staged until local hernia sac inflammation resolved following appendicectomy. CONCLUSION: Surgeons should have an index of suspicion for Amyand's hernia given the heterogeneity of presentations. A case-by-case approach is required to prevent post-operative complications and determine the safe timing of definitive hernia repair when the inguinal hernial sac is inflamed. Further research is required to provide surgeons with evidence-based approaches for this unique condition.

Non-gravid uterine torsion associated with small bowel obstruction.

Uterine torsion is a rare condition. Even more so in cases of non-gravid torsion. We present the case of a post-menopausal woman in her 70s who arrived to our emergency department acutely unwell with abdominal pain and vomiting on a background of a large leiomyomatous uterus, complicated by aspiration pneumonia, acute anaemia, and acute kidney injury. Computed tomography demonstrated a small bowel obstruction secondary to a large heterogeneous calcified pelvic mass. Laparotomy performed demonstrated a large leimyomatous uterus that had torted on the cervical pedicle associated with perforation of the lower anterior segment. A short segment of healthy jejunum was adhered to the uterine fundus, which was easily mobilized. Total hysterectomy and bilateral oophorectomy was performed. The patient made a full recovery. Histopathology demonstrated a calcified leiomyomatous uterus with adjacent haemorrhagic infarction of the uterine wall.

Proceed or palliate: Surgicel® mimicking tumor recurrence and causing a small bowel obstruction.

Surgicel® is a commonly used hemostatic agent. We report a case of small bowel obstruction secondary to the prior placement of Surgicel® within the peritoneal cavity, and the radiological diagnosis conundrum and potential prognostic implications this finding has in a patient with a known history of malignancy.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy: a comparison of primary outcome measures.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of the study was to compare laparoscopic and open appendectomy (OA) in terms of primary outcome measures. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial. Place and duration of the study: Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar, Pakistan, February 2008 to December 2009. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 160 patients were divided into two groups, A and B. Group A patients were subjected to laparoscopic appendectomy (LA), whereas Group B patients were subjected to OA. Data regarding age, gender, and primary outcome measures, such as hospital stay, operative duration, and postoperative complication, were recorded and analyzed. Percentages were calculated for categorical data, whereas numerical data were represented as mean ± SD. Chi-square test and t test were used to compare categorical and numerical variables, respectively. Probability ≤ 0.05 (P ≤ 0.05) was considered significant. RESULTS: After randomization, 72 patients in group A and 75 patients in group B were analyzed. The mean age of patients in groups A and B was 23.09 ± 8.51 and 23.12 ± 10.42 years, respectively, (P = 0.981). The mean hospital stay was 1.52 ± 0.76 days in group A and 1.70 ± 1.06 days in group B (P = 0.294). The mean operative duration in group A and B were 47.54 ± 12.82 min and 31.36 ± 11.43 min, respectively (P < 0.001). Pain (overall level) was significantly less in group A compared with group B (P = 0.004). The two groups were comparable in terms of other postoperative complications, such as hematoma (P = 0.87), paralytic ileus (P = 0.086), urinary retention (P = 0.504), and wound infection (P = 0.134). CONCLUSION: LA is an equivalent procedure and not superior to OA in terms of primary outcome measures.

Metanephric adenoma: a rare benign renal tumour.

Metanephric adenoma is a rare benign renal tumour. We are reporting one histologically proven such case in a 23 year old male from Afghanistan. He presented with severe right flank pain since 3 weeks. Nephrectomy was done and histopathology was consistent with the diagnosis of metanephric adenoma. This novel renal mass has been reported to have benign clinical course despite its symptomatic presentation and large tumour size. There is no distinguishing radiological feature with can differentiate it from malignant tumours. So far, a uniformly benign clinical course has been associated with Metanephric adenoma, but given its relatively recent identification and rarity and the lack of clinical, radiographic, or cytologic means to establish a definite diagnosis, Metanephric adenoma remains primarily a pathologic diagnosis.

Pre- and postoperative immunonutrition in patients undergoing liver transplantation: a pilot study of safety and efficacy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Malnutrition is common in patients with end-stage liver disease and is a risk factor for post-transplant morbidity. The goal of this study was to assess the safety of an immune-enhancing diet in patients undergoing liver transplantation and to investigate its effects on nutritional status. METHODS: Fifteen consecutive patients received oral Impact (0.6l/d) for a median 54 (range 10-168)d pre-transplant and enteral Impact was started early after transplant. Total body protein was measured prior to commencing supplemental Impact, immediately prior to transplant and 10, 15, 30, 90, and 180 days post-transplant. The results were compared with those from 17 patients who received standard nutritional intervention. RESULTS: All study patients tolerated Impact pre- and postoperatively and there were no safety concerns. Over the preoperative period total body protein increased significantly (P = 0.017). In 7 patients followed for 6 months post-transplant, a significant (P = 0.026) loss of body protein occurred over the first 15 postoperative days which was regained by 6 months. In the patients who did not receive Impact, body protein did not change preoperatively and the loss after surgery was not regained. Infectious complications occurred in 5/15 (33%) Impact patients and 12/17 (71%) non-Impact patients (P = 0.074). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with end-stage liver disease, our results suggest the possibility that Impact may have a role in improving preoperative nutritional status, hastening recovery after transplant, and reducing postoperative infectious complications. These potential benefits need to be confirmed in a randomised controlled trial.