ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The so-called Schloffer tumor (ST) is a rare inflammatory pseudotumor. It usually appears several years after abdominal surgery or trauma. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 32-year-old man was referred to our hospital complaining of a painful mass in the left hypochondrium, postprandial distension and a weight loss of about 14kg. He had had a left inguinal hernioplasty without mesh the previous year. Ultrasonography of the abdomen showed a 2cm×2cm hypoechoic lesion in contact with the abdominal wall. Computerized tomography of the abdomen showed a heterogeneous mass in the great omentum. Laparoscopic exploration revealed an omental mass firmly attached to the abdominal wall. A great deal of purulent fluid spread during the procedure. Due to the difficult exploration, the procedure converted to hand assisted laparoscopy. We find an omental tumor involving the stomach and the transverse colon. Inside the mass there were purulent material and non-absorbable sutures. A drain was left inside the cavity of the abscess. Histological examination showed chronic inflammation. DISCUSSION: ST characteristically presents a central chronic abscess containing non-absorbable sutures. It has been described after appendectomy, hernioplasty, hysterectomy, gastrectomy or colonic resections. Although benign, its progressive growth and infiltrating behavior resemble malignant tumors. CONCLUSION: We suggest that a mini-invasive approach should always be performed. The interesting thing about this case is the appearance of the tumor in a place far away from the previous surgical site. A simple drainage and removal of suture material solves the problem of these patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Early oral feeding (EOF) has been demonstrated to be safe and beneficial after abdominal elective surgery. The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to assess the safety and benefits of EOF compared to traditional postoperative care (TPC) after abdominal emergency surgery. METHODS: Patients assigned to the EOF group commenced a soft diet within 24 h after surgery. In the TPC group, a liquid diet was commenced upon passage of flatus or stool and then advanced to soft food. The primary endpoint was the complication rate. Secondary endpoints were severity of complications, mortality, gastrointestinal leaks, surgical-site infection, reoperation, diet intolerance, time to first flatus and stool, amount of food intake, postoperative discomfort, hospital stay, weight loss at the 15th postoperative day and incisional hernias. RESULTS: A total of 295 patients assigned to EOF (n = 148) or TPC (n = 147) were analyzed. No significant differences were seen in the complications rates (EOF 45.3 % vs. TPC 37.4 %; p = 0.1). There was a significantly higher rate of vomiting with EOF (EOF 13.5 % vs. TPC 6.1 %; p = 0.03), with no differences in nasogastric tube reinsertion. EOF patients' food intake was proportionally lower for the first three meals than that of TPC patients (p < 0.01). Postoperative discomfort survey revealed more hunger in the TPC group (p < 0.01). There were no differences in postoperative ileus or length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: EOF was safe after abdominal emergency surgery. EOF was associated with more vomiting (treated easily and without patient discomfort) and less hunger than with TPC. No other EOF-related benefits could be demonstrated during this trial.
