| Home
> Table of Contents
> Case Reports |
| |
| Unusual Histological Findings
in Meckel’s Diverticulum : A Case Report and Literature
Review |
| |
| RK Yallapragada*, B Ali**,
McLatchie*** |
| |
| Meckel’s diverticulum
is a known entity but perforated Meckel’s diverticulum associated
with carcinoid tumour and ectopic gastric mucosa is a rare finding.
We report such a case. |
| |
| Introduction |
True incidence of Meckel’s diverticulum
is much higher as compared to cases reported in literature.
Only Meckel’s diverticulum of high clinical importance
has been reported so far. Carcinoid tumour in perforated
Meckel’s diverticulum with ectopic gastric mucosa
has been reported in only two cases before and this is
a third one, out of 86 and 118 cases of reported perforated
Meckel’s diverticulum and carcinoid tumour in Meckel’s
diverticulum respectively. Here we are reporting a rare
case of perforated Meckel’s diverticulum associated
with carcinoid tumour and ectopic gastric mucosa.
|
| |
| Case Report |
An 18 year old presented with sudden onset of stabbing,
colicky lower abdominal pain after opening his bowels
the day before admission. He had vomited four times (bilious),
bowels not opened since the onset of pain. No significant
past medical and surgical history. He was pyrexial but
haemodynamically stable. The White cell count was elevated
32.5 x 109 per L. Erect chest and supine abdominal X-rays
were inconclusive of pneumo peritoneum. As signs of peritonitis
were obvious on examination, he underwent laparotomy via
mid line incision. Findings were marked pus in pelvis,
perforated and acutely inflamed Meckel’s diverticulum
stuck in the pelvis. A band of adhesions from loop of
Meckel’s to small bowel mesentery. Excision of Meckel’s
diverticulum with a loop of small bowel was performed.
Histology revealed ulceration and perforation in the
region adjacent to heterotopic gastric mucosa, with a
tiny, microscopic focus of carcinoid tumour in the outer,
muscularis propria (which stained positive for the immunostain
chromografin) of the Meckel’s diverticulum.
At follow up after 3 years, the patient is totally asymptomatic
and clinical examination was normal. On USS of liver and
5H1AA examination of the urine, nothing abnormal was detected. |
| |
| Discussion |
Meckel’s diverticulum is clinically silent and
only discovered at the time of complications like inflammation,
haemorrhage, obstruction, and tumour. It can mimic common
abdominal disorders such as Crohn’s disease, appendicitis
and peptic ulcer disease. It causes complications more
frequently in males2 and therefore, is more often diagnosed
in them. In a collective review of 1806 cases, the complications
were as follows; haemorrhage in 31%, inflammation in 25%,
band obstruction in 16%, intussusception in 11%, hernia
entrapment in 11%, umbilical sinus or fistula formation
in 4%, and tumour formation in 2%.3 Yamaguchi et al4 reported
the largest modern series of symptomatic Meckels diverticula
(600 cases of which nearly 50% were adults) which has
reported intestinal obstruction (37%) was a more common
complication than haemorrhage (12%). Malignancies in complicated
Meckel's diverticulum are found in only 0.5 to 4.9 percent
of patients. Carcinoids are the most common neoplasms,
followed by sarcomas and adenocarcinomas.5 Stromal tumours
including only 7 perforations out of 98 cases6 and adenocarcinoma
in Meckel’s diverticulum in 36 cases as well as
epithelioma and lymphosarcomatosis one each in perforated
Meckel’s diverticulum are reported in current literature.
Methods of diagnosis were laparotomy (66%) and autopsy
(34%). |
| |
| Diagnosis and Treatment |
The most useful method of diagnosis is technetium-99m
pertechnate scanning. However, the technetium scan depends
on uptake by heterotopic gastric mucosa.7 Complications
from Meckel’s diverticulum is surgical; Solitary,
localized, asymptomatic nodules of less than 1 cm are generally
managed either by simple excision in the transverse axis
of the ileum to avoid luminal stenosis, or by resection
of the adjacent ileal wall or a segment of ileum with anastamosis.
The latter is reserved for patients with complicated diverticula.
Larger or multiple lesions require wide excision of bowel
and mesentery, and hepatic resection may be required for
metastatic disease.8 Although uncommon, many cases of Meckel’s
diverticulum may be quite suitable for laparoscopic diagnosis
and treatment.9 Results of surgical excision are generally
excellent.
|
| |
| References |
| 1. |
John P Martin, Pamela D
Connor, Kerri Charles, JD Meckel’s diverticulum.
Am Fam Physician 2000; 61 (4) : 1037-42,1044. |
| 2. |
Arnold JF, Pellicane JV. Meckel’s
diverticulum: A ten-year experience. Am Surg 1997;
63 : 354-5. |
| 3. |
Williams RS. Management of Meckel’s
diverticulum. Br J Surg 1981; 68 : 477-80. |
| 4. |
Yamaguchi M, Takeuchi S, Awazu S.
Meckel’s diverticulum investigation of 600 patients
in the Japanese literature. Am J Surg 1978; 136 :
247-9. |
| 5. |
Weber JD. Carcinoid tumours in Meckel’s
Diverticula: J Clin Gastroenterol 1989; 11 (6) : 682-6. |
| 6. |
Fruhauf CH, Garcia A, Rosso R. Stromal
tumour in a perforated Meckel’s diverticulum:
A case report Swiss Surg 2002; 8 (6) : 273-6. |
| 7. |
Weber JD, McFadden DW. Carcinoid tumours
in Meckel’s diverticulum. J Clin Gastroenterol
1981; 11 : 682-6. |
| 8. |
Carpenter SS, Grillis ME. Meckel’s
diverticulitis secondary to carcinoid tumour: An usual
presentation of the acute abdomen in an adult. Curr
Surg 2003; 60 (3) : 301-3. |
| 9. |
Sanders LE. Laparoscopic treatment
of Meckels diverticulum: Obstruction and bleeding
managed with minimal morbidity. Surg Endose 1995;
9 : 724-7. |
| |
|
ROFECOXIB AND CORONARY HEART DISEASE
‘Rofecoxib increases the risk of serious coronary heart disease‘
Cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX2)-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to treat musculo-skeletal disorders such as arthritis. However, the issue of whether one particular COX2-selective drug-rofecoxib-might increase the risk of coronary heart disease is controversial. Using data from health-care records, David Graham and colleagues sought to establish if risk for serious coronary heart disease was higher with rofecoxib than with other NSAIDs. They reported that serious coronary events were increased with rofecoxib use. The researchers say that, in view of previous findings of high cardiac risk with this drug, rofecoxib should have been withdrawn from the market much earlier than 2004; such action could have prevented many thousands of deaths from coronary heart disease. In a Comment paper, Simon Maxwell and David Webb discuss what we have learnt about the management of new drugs - both by manufacturers and regulatory authorities - and say that increased attention will now fall on the cardiovascular safety of other COX2-selective drugs.
Lancet, 2004; 449, 475. |
|
|
|
*Senior House Officer in General Surgery, University Hospital of Hartlepool, UK. **Locum Consultant Surgeon (Colorectal), James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK. ***Consultant Surgeon (Sports Surgery), University Hospital of Hartlepool, North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust, Hartlepool, UK.
|
|
|