Nueclear Web Banner
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

Does it matter if it is appendix mucocele instead of appendicitis? Case series and brief review of literature


1 Department of General Surgery, Health Science University, Umraniye Education and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
2 Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Turkey
3 Department of General Surgery, Umraniye Education and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
4 Department of Radiology, Health Science University, Umraniye Education and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

Correspondence Address:
Fatih Basak,
Department of General Surgery, Health Science University, Umraniye Education and Research Hospital, Istanbul
Turkey
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

Aims: Appendiceal mucocele (AM) is a rare pathology, and its reported incidence is 0.3% in all appendectomy specimens. Here, we report a case series of AM and make a brief review of literature. Subjects and Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively collected data of patients who diagnosed as AM by histopathological evaluation between January 2009 and June 2015 were demographic data including age and gender, intraoperative findings, and histopathological reports were recorded. All cases were followed-up by routine examination and telephone interview. Statistical Analysis Used: Definitive statistical methods (mean, standard deviation, median, frequency, and percentage) were used to evaluate the study data Results: Twelve patients were examined in the study with diagnose of AM. The mean age was 51.8 ± 18.6 years (26–83). Female-to-male ratio was 1.4 (7/5). Indications for surgery were acute abdomen in 8 (72.7%) patients with presumptive diagnosis of acute appendicitis and were AM in four patients diagnosed by imaging. Histopathological evaluation revealed mucinous cystadenoma in eight patients, simple retention cysts in three, and borderline mucinous tumor (pseudomyxoma peritonei) in one. The neuroendocrine tumor was obtained on the remaining portion of the appendix in one of the simple retention cysts patients. None of the patients died because of the AM with an average follow-up of 43 months (range: 7–74). Conclusions: Surgical resection is the first choice therapy for AM. Precise treatment modality can remain unclear in some patients because of insufficient preoperative diagnosis. It is nonmalign AM mostly however having mucocele matters because of the significant association with synchronous tumors.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Basak F
    -  Hasbahceci M
    -  Yucel M
    -  Sisik A
    -  Acar A
    -  Kilic A
    -  Su Dur MS
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed299    
    PDF Downloaded25    

Recommend this journal