Case Report: 7-Year-Old Boy with Incarcerated Internal Hernia Leading to Extensive Intestinal Necrosis Due to a Large Congenital Mesenteric Defect.

We present a case of a 7-year-old boy with acute abdominal symptoms initially misdiagnosed as constipation. Delayed imaging diagnostics revealed an ileus with contorted small intestine, so laparotomy was indicated. An acute bowel obstruction was found based on an incarcerated internal hernia. Small and large bowel segments were incarcerated into a large mesenteric defect leading to extended intestinal necrosis. About 30 cm of necrotic small bowel and 15 cm of large intestine were resected, two primary anastomoses were performed. The mesenteric defect was closed with two running sutures. The boy's clinical outcome was very good. Two aspects are discussed: the initial clinical misdiagnosis of acute bowel obstruction in a child leading to a delay of diagnostics and therapy on the one hand and the origin of mesenteric defects on the other. In children with abdominal pain, ultrasound must be performed as soon as possible and pediatric surgeons have to be involved early. There should be an awareness of the fact, that mesenteric defects and other congenital malformations can occur more often than we suspect it. In the case of an internal hernia, a misjudgement of the clinical condition may be very harmful for the patient and can lead to a short bowel syndrome or even death.

Patient preferences regarding intraoperative versus external beam radiotherapy for early breast cancer and the impact of socio-demographic factors.

PURPOSE: Patient comfort and preference have steadily gained attention in radio-oncologic treatment of breast cancer. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to further explore patient preferences in choosing between intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). METHODS: We prospectively analysed data of 101 women, who were candidates for breast-conserving surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy. A two-part video was shown to patients: an educational section about EBRT/IORT, followed by a preference elicitation section focusing on additional accepted risk (AAR) of recurrence after either treatment. Furthermore, participants completed a questionnaire to identify factors that influence patient preference of radiation modality. RESULTS: The data demonstrate that 42.5% of patients would accept additional risk of recurrence for IORT versus 9% AAR for EBRT, while 48.5% of patients would not accept any additional risk, yet would choose IORT over EBRT if risks of recurrence were equivalent. When combining patient preferences and the results from the questionnaire, no single socio-economic/-demographic factor was found to significantly correlate with AAR of IORT. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms the existence of subgroups of breast cancer patients who would accept an additional risk of recurrence associated with choice of radiation modality to receive a single dose of IORT as adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer instead of EBRT over several weeks; yet our data fail to identify a single factor significantly associated with these patient preferences and, therefore, helpful for individualised decision-making processes.