¿Puede ser una apendicitis aguda la primera manifestación de endometriosis? / Can acute appendicitis be the first manifestation of endometrial disease?

Objetivo. Demostrar la relación entre la afectación endometriósica del apéndice cecal y el desarrollo de una apendicitis aguda. Pacientes y métodos. Presentamos una serie institucional de 8 pacientes con endometriosis apendicular diagnosticadas tras apendicectomía entre junio de 2009 y marzo de 2014. Resultados. La media de edad fue 40,6 años, 6 en edad fértil. En 5 (62,5%) la afectación endometriósica apendicular resultó única y en 3 (37,5%) múltiple, fundamentalmente en el ovario. Siete (87,5%) iniciaron los síntomas como una apendicitis aguda. Los implantes endometriósicos afectaban la capa serosa en 6 pacientes, la capa muscular en una y la grasa periapendicular en otra. Conclusión. El diagnóstico de endometriosis apendicular en mujeres con apendicitis aguda solo se puede realizar tras el examen de las piezas de apendicectomía, aunque puede ser sospechado en el contexto clínico. La laparoscopia permite un diagnóstico adecuado con exploración completa de la pelvis, la apendicectomía y el tratamiento de otras lesiones (AU)

Aim. To determine the relationship between endometriotic involvement of the appendix and the development of acute appendicitis. Patients and methods. We report a series of 8 patients with appendiceal endometriosis diagnosed after appendicectomy from June 2009 to March 2014. Results. The mean age was 40.6 years. Six patients were of reproductive age. Endometriotic appendiceal involvement alone was found in 5 patients (62.5%) and multiorgan involvement, mainly affecting the ovary, in 3 patients (37.5%). Clinical presentation was acute appendicitis in 7 patients (87.5%). Endometriotic implants involved the serous layer in 6 patients, the muscle layer in one patient, and periappendiceal fat in another patient. Conclusion. Diagnosis of appendiceal endometriosis in women with acute appendicitis can only be performed after specimen study, although it may be suspected in the clinical context. Laparoscopy allows pelvic and abdominal cavity examination, appendectomy, and the treatment of other lesions (AU)

Video-assisted laparoscopic débridement for retroperitoneal pancreatic collections: a reliable step-up approach.

Several minimal access routes have been implemented as a step-up approach to treat infected pancreatic necrosis. We evaluate our experience with a series of consecutive patients with pancreatic collections treated with video-assisted retroperitoneal débridement (VARD). Seven patients were consecutively treated with VARD: five patients after acute necrotizing pancreatitis, one chronic pancreatitis, and one patient with perforation after endoscopic sphincterotomy. The indication for VARD was: development of sepsis, positive direct culture of the necrosis, and compartment syndrome. The procedure was performed under general anesthesia and modified lateral decubitus. There were four left, two right, and one bilateral VARD. Mean hospital stay since admission to VARD procedure was 30 days (range, 12 to 72 days). Mean operative time was 63 minutes. There were no intraoperative complications. Two patients needed a second procedure to control sepsis. Most patients had a long intensive care unit (ICU) stay with 6.1 days (range, 2 to 22 days) mean postoperative ICU stay. One patient had a hypernatremia as a consequence of saline lavage and three patients presented pancreatic fistula that were managed with conservative treatment. There was no mortality. VARD approach is a recommended step-up approach to treat infected pancreatic necrosis, and its indication may be extended to treat other retroperitoneal collections.