Loading…
Tension pneumothorax, pneumoretroperitoneum, and subcutaneous emphysema after colonoscopic polypectomy: a case report and review of the literature
Background and aims Colonoscopic complications are not frequent. Cases with colon perforations without the presence of pneumoperitoneum are very rare, and those with the development of tension pneumothorax are even rarer. The aim of this article was to present a unique case of the colon perforation...
Saved in:
Published in: | Langenbeck's archives of surgery 2009, Vol.394 (1), p.185-189 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Background and aims
Colonoscopic complications are not frequent. Cases with colon perforations without the presence of pneumoperitoneum are very rare, and those with the development of tension pneumothorax are even rarer. The aim of this article was to present a unique case of the colon perforation during colonoscopic polypectomy.
Case report
We report a unique case of the colon perforation made between the two layers of the sigmoid mesocolon during colonoscopic polypectomy. The colon perforation had not been recognized during colonoscopic polypectomy, but the patient stayed at the hospital to be observed for the possible remitted bleeding after polypectomy. The colon perforation was followed by the development of the left-sided tension pneumothorax with massive mediastinum tending to move to the right, pneumoretroperitoneum, subcutaneous emphysema of the head, neck, and body, but without pneumoperitoneum. Tube drainage of the left pleural cavity was performed with release a great amount of air under pressure and then an urgent laparotomy when there was no free gas in the peritoneal cavity. After mobilizing the sigmoid colon, pneumoretroperitoneum and sigmoid colon perforation of 1.5 mm in diameter between two mesosigmoid layers were discovered. Partial sigmoidectomy was performed. A pathohistological examination verified a deepithelized area of 12 mm and a perforation of 1.5-mm diameter. The patient was dismissed as recovered 7 days after.
Conclusion
The patient was well prepared for colonoscopy, without other general diseases, and operated on quickly after the perforation (within 2 h from the perforation), without any significant retroperitoneum contamination. These are the factors for a favorable outcome of the treatment. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1435-2443 1435-2451 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00423-008-0309-3 |