RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Intestinal obstruction considered to be one of the most common surgical presentation. Adhesions secondary to previous operations, hernias, neoplasms, inflammatory bowel disease, intussusception, or volvulus are the usual causes of intestinal obstruction but bezoar can presents in 0.4-4%. Bezoar can be trapped in different locations throughout the gastrointestinal tract and it can be solitary or multiple lesions. CASE PRESENTATION: This is a 37-year-old male, known case of diabetes mellitus, Presented to the Emergency Department complaining of generalized abdominal pain for 2 days duration. Associated with abdominal distention, fever, nausea, vomiting and obstipation. There was a history of persimmon intake. Unremarkable past surgical history. On examination, He was tachycardic, other vital signs were within normal. Abdominal examination showed abdominal distention and Sluggish bowel sound. Abdominal X-ray revealed multiple air-fluid levels. An abdominal CT scan with IV contrast revealed an intra-luminal mass in the ileum and intra-gastric mass with suspicious of bezoars. He underwent exploratory laparotomy, gastrostomy to remove intra-gastric bezoar, and enterotomy to remove the ileal bezoar. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: Intestinal obstruction is considered to be the most common complication of this entity; other possible complications include gastric ulcer, gastritis, and gastric perforation. Due to limitations of endoscopy and barium enema in the diagnosis of bezoar, Abdominal CT-scan is considered to be the gold standard in the diagnosis. The management of phytobezoar can be either conservative or surgical, depends on the lesion size and location. CONCLUSION: Although intestinal obstruction secondary to bezoar is rare, multiple levels of gastrointestinal obstruction should raise the suspicion of bezoar.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Many studies have shown that open and laparoscopicsurgery for resection of colonic cancers produce similar short- and long-term results, but no data have been reported from Saudi Arabia. OBJECTIVE: Compare 3-year disease-free and overall survival after laparoscopic versus open curative resection for potentially curable colon cancer. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary academic hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed data of patients who underwent curative resection for potentially curable colon cancer using the laparoscopic or open approach at three tertiary care centers during the period 2000-2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall and disease-free 3-year survival were the primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints included conversion rate, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, rate of wound infection, resumption of bowel function, number of lymph nodes retrieved, adequacy of resection and rate of recurrence. Risk factors for recurrence, including complete mesocolic excision, were assessed. SAMPLE SIZE: 721. RESULTS: Patient and tumor characteristics were similar in the two groups except for ASA class ( P<.01), weight ( P<.05) and tumor stage ( P<.05). Over a median follow-up of 46 months, the 3-year overall survival was 76.7% for open resection and 90.3% for laparoscopic colon resection ( P<.05). The 3-year disease-free survival was 55.3% for open colon resection and 64.9% for laparoscopic colon resection ( P=.0714). CONCLUSION: Overall and disease-free survival after the laparoscopic approach for curative resection of colon cancer is comparable to the open approach. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design and the possibility of selection bias. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None.