Home
About Us
Issues
Authors
Reviewers
Users
Subscription
Our Other Journals
Site map
Aims and Scope
Salient Features
Editorial Board
Editorial Statements
Editorial-PeerReview Process
Publication Ethics & Malpractice
Ijars Performance
Journal Policy
Contact Us
Current Issue
Forthcoming
Article Archive
Access Statistics
Simple Search
Advanced Search
Submit an Article
Instructions
Assistance
Publication Fee
Paid Services
Apply As Reviewer
Acknowledgment
Register Here Edit Register
Register For Article Submission
Login Here Logout
Login For Article Submission
Annual
Buy One Issue
Payment Options
How to Order
JCDR
IJNMR
NJLM

 

Welcome : Guest

Users Online :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case report

Year :2016 Month : July-August Volume : 5 Issue : 3 Page : - Full Version

Case Report : Spontaneous Caecal Rupture – A Disaster


Aditya Arvind Manekar, Nishigandh Dnyaneshwar Patil, Tushar B Patil
1. Resident, Department of General Surgery, ACPM Medical College, Dhule, Maharashtra, India. 2. Resident, Department of General Surgery, ACPM Medical College, Dhule, Maharashtra, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of General Surgery, ACPM Medical College, Dhule, Maharashtra, India.
 
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Aditya Arvind Manekar,
B-7/401, Saket Complex, Majiwade,
Thane (West) - 400601, Maharashtra, India.
E-mail: dr.aditya.manekar@gmail.com
 
ABSTRACT

: We present a case of a spontaneous caecal rupture in a 70 years old man with history of undergoing Trans Urethral Resection of Prostate (TURP) prior to the above presentation. The patient presented postoperatively (after TURP) with complains of abdominal distension, pain and vomiting was absent and tachycardia along with respiratory distress. No associated intra abdominal pathology was found. Early diagnosis and prompt surgical intervention is the only way for management of such cases.
Keywords : Abdominal distension, Laparotomy, TURP
DOI and Others : 10.7860/IJARS/2016/20576:2161
 
Case Report

A 70-year-old male patient, post op case of TURP (procedure was uneventful) done 4 days back, complained of mild abdominal pain with distension. Patient had no other significant history. On general examination, patient was tachycardiac though, other findings were normal. Per abdomen showed distension with generalized mild abdominal tenderness and guarding on right side of abdomen and absent bowel sounds. Looking at the history, we suspected that such a complication was not due to the surgery, as any traumatic bowel or bladder perforation wound have presented early or immediately post operatively. Our patient presented 4 days after the surgery and hence the relation with the surgery (TURP) was less likely. Per rectal examination showed remnants of stool on gloves no blood and no masses were palpable. Lab reports showed increased WBC counts with no other significant findings. Standing X-ray abdomen showed a significant amount of gas under diaphragm. USG abdomen was also showing free gas in peritoneal cavity with partially liquefied collection in Right Iliac Fossa (RIF) and Right Hypochondriac Fossa (RHF). Plain CT-scan with contrast administered through the Ryle’s tube showed free gas in the peritoneal cavity but no extravasation of contrast was seen. IV antibiotics and supportive treatment was started. We considered the possibility of perforative peritonitis, acute perforated appendix, acute exacerbation of Crohn’s disease, acute exacerbation of colitis.

Decision was taken for exploratory laparotomy, which showed feculent peritonitis with dilated bowel loops and irregular perforation in the anterior caecal wall. Right hemicolectomy with ileo-transverse anastomosis was done with thorough Keywords: Abdominal distension, Laparotomy, TURP peritoneal lavage given. Postoperatively, patient showed poor signs of recovery with collapsing vital parameters. Patient was given respiratory support through a ventilator but succumbed to death 2 days postsurgery. Histopathology report of the excised specimen showed (Acute inflammatory changes) Acute or chronic colitis with peritonitis (Table/Fig 1),(Table/Fig 2),(Table/Fig 3),(Table/Fig 4).
 
 
Discussion

Perforation of the healthy caecum is not a common condition. It may have many causes, few of which include trauma to the right side of the abdomen, ingested foreign bodies, e.g. tooth-pick or a fish-bone, distal large bowel obstruction, unrelieved Volvulus of the caecum. It is extremely rare to find spontaneous caecal rupture in the absence of above factors. We definespontaneous perforation of colon (SPC) as a sudden perforation of apparently healthy colon in absence of diseases or injury [1,2]. SPC is a rare clinical condition which is less often reported, not more than 100 cases have been reported (3). Severe peritonitis is always the consequence associated with gas under diaphragm on abdominal radiographs and surgical intervention is always necessary. Patients in extremes of age groups, especially elderly and premature infants are involved more commonly, however it can occur in all (4),(5).

Spontaneous caecal rupture is an emergency condition and early diagnosis and laparotomy is the only way of treatment. In elderly cases, 65 years is the mean age. Males are more prone to develop perforation, the ratio of elderly males to females being 2:1.The anti-mesenteric border of the gut is the area of physiological ischemia (6). There is a greater incidence of perforations in mid-sigmoid regions, cecum, rectosigmoid, descending and transverse colon. It was reported by Maurer et al., that 64% of perforations especially feculent, occur in these regions (7). Clinically, the signs and symptoms may point towards acute appendicitis, Crohn’s disease or Tuberculous (TB) enterocolitis. SPC can be diagnosed only when we rule out other causes of perforation. There may be pericolic fat stranding, segmental thickening, and presence of fluids in addition to assessment of vascularity of the bowel on Contrast Enhanced Computerised Tomography (CECT). Abdominal paracentesis can prove to be a valuable tool for diagnosis was suggested by some authors in their study (8).

The mortality of perforated caecum is high, varyingfrom 35 % to 72 % (Albers, Smith & Carter, 1956;Wangensteen, 1955; Lowman & Davis, 1956). Animportant factor is the delay in diagnosis as the clinical picture may be confusing. Gross abdominaldistension with slight pain and tenderness maybe the only positive finding. Straight X-ray of the abdomen will show free gas under the diaphragm. A caecum with a transversediameter of 9cm or over was an indication of impending caecal perforation, which was stated by Lowman and Davis. The caecum usually remains distendedeven after perforation (Rack, 1952, and presentcases) probably because the tear becomes sealed off.Measurement of the size of the caecum is thereforehelpful in anticipating and diagnosing caecal perforation (9),(10),(11).

There are 2 types of SPC, idiopathic & stercoral types. In our case, looking at the clinical picture, it was apparently an idiopathic type of perforation. There is minimal fecal contamination in idiopathic type and hence it has a better prognosis compared to the latter. There are two hypotheses to explain idiopathic perforations: Vascular theory suggests combination of hypoperfusion of colonic tissue ®ional weakness of the bowel wall plus increased intraluminal pressure which results from intestinal hernia, rectal prolapse, or abnormal depth of Douglas pouch (12). Stercoral perforation (1.2% of all colorectal surgical emergencies, 3.2% of all colonic perforations) is more frequent with chronic constipation. In their study, Maurer et al., have described stercoral perforation as rounded, of more than 1cm in diameter, with colon being full of stools along with ischemic necrosis of the surrounding mucosa and acute inflammatory reaction. Wisconsin Medical College study states that 2.3% of all renal transplant patients are prone to SPC (14). In our case, ascending colectomy was the treatment of choice.
 
 
Conclusion

SPC is a serious condition and prompt surgical treatment is always the definitive management. Prognosis of SPC is generally poor and is dependent on degree of peritoneal contamination, the time of onset and prompt surgical intervention. We should make every effort to diagnose the condition correctly along with a quick surgical intervention.
 
REFERENCES
1.
Yang B and Ni HK. Diagnosis and treatment of spontaneous colonic perforation: analysis of 10 cases. World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14(28):4569-72.
2.
Ni HK . How to diagnose and treat spontaneous colonic perforation? Health & Medicine. 2008;8:29.
3.
Zachariah SK and Raja N. Spontaneous perforation of the colon and hypothyroidism: report of a case and review of literature. Gastroenterology Research. 2002;3(7):147-49.
4.
Sheikholeslami F. Spontaneous perforation of rectosigmoid colon. Iranian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2009;24(2): 137–41.
5.
Kim ES and Brandt ML. Spontaneous Intestinal Perforation of the Newborn. 2013.
6.
Galanis I, Dragoumis D, Kalogirou T, Lakis S and Kotakidou R. Spontaneous perforation of solitary ulcer of transverse colon. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2010 ;53(1):138-40.
7.
Maurer CA, Renzulli P, Mazzucchelli L, Egger B, Seiler CA and Buchler MW . Use of Accurate Diagnostic Criteria May Increase Incidence of Stercoral Perforation of the Colon. Diseases of the Colon Rectum. 2000;43:991-98.
8.
Li MJ, Xiang JB and Chen LL. Emergency treatment for colonic perforation (29 Patients Reported). Zhongguo Linchuang Yixue. 2001;11.
9.
Albers JM, Smith LL and Carter R. Perforation of the cecum. Ann Surg. 1956 ; 143(2): 251–55.
10.
Wangensteen OH. Intestinal Obstructions, 3rd ed, p39 Charles C. Thomas, Springfield 1955.
11.
Lowman RM & Davis L. An evaluation of cecal size and impending perforation of the cecum. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1956;103(6):711-18.
12.
Serpell JW and Nicholls RJ. Stercoral perforation of the colon. British Journal of Surgery. 1990;77:1325-29.
13.
Puglisi BS, Kauffman HM, Stewart ET, Dodds WT, Adams MB and Komorowski RA. Colonic Perforation in Renal Transplant Patients. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology. 1985;145, 555-58.  [Google Scholar]
 
TABLES AND FIGURES
[Table/Fig-1] [Table/Fig-2] [Table/Fig-3] [Table/Fig-4]
 
 
 

In This Article

  • Abstract
  • Material and Methods
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • References

Article Utilities

  • Readers Comments
  • Article in PDF
  • Citation Manager
  • How to Cite
  • Article Statistics
  • Link to PUBMED
  • Print this Article
  • Send to a Friend

Quick Links

REVIEWER
ACCESS STATISTICS
Home  |  About Us  |  Online First  |  Current Issue  |  Simple Search  |  Advance Search  |  Register  |  Login  |  Contact  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Author Support  |  Submit Manuscript  |  IJARS Pre-Publishing  |  Reviewer  |  Articles Archive  |  Access Statistics
©INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANATOMY RADIOLOGY & SURGERY (IJARS), ISSN : 2277-8543.
EDITORIAL OFFICE : 1/9, Roop Nagar, Delhi 11000. Phone : 01123848553

* This Journal is owned and run by medical professionals *