Unusual histopathological findings in appendectomy specimens: A retrospective analysis and literature review

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorAkbulut, Sami
dc.contributor.authorTas, Mahmut
dc.contributor.authorSogutcu, Nilgun
dc.contributor.authorArikanoglu, Zulfu
dc.contributor.authorBasbug, Murat
dc.contributor.authorUlku, Abdullah
dc.contributor.authorSemur, Heybet
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:20:57Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:20:57Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractAIM: To document unusual findings in appendectomy specimens. METHODS: The clinicopathological data of 5262 patients who underwent appendectomies for presumed acute appendicitis from January 2006 to October 2010 were reviewed retrospectively. Appendectomies performed as incidental procedures during some other operation were excluded. We focused on 54 patients who had unusual findings in their appendectomy specimens. We conducted a literature review via the PubMed and Google Scholar databases of English language studies published between 2000 and 2010 on unusual findings in appendectomy specimens. RESULTS: Unusual findings were determined in 54 (1%) cases by histopathology. Thirty were male and 24 were female with ages ranging from 15 to 84 years (median, 32.2 +/- 15.1 years). Final pathology revealed 37 cases of enterobiasis, five cases of carcinoids, four mucinous cystadenomas, two eosinophilic infiltrations, two mucoceles, two tuberculosis, one goblet-cell carcinoid, and one neurogenic hyperplasia. While 52 patients underwent a standard appendectomy, two patients who were diagnosed with tuberculous appendicitis underwent a right hemicolectomy. All tumors were located at the distal part of the appendix with a mean diameter of 6.8 mm (range, 4-10 mm). All patients with tumors were alive and disease-free during a mean follow-up of 17.8 mo. A review of 1366 cases reported in the English literature is also discussed. CONCLUSION: Although unusual pathological findings are seldom seen during an appendectomy, all appendectomy specimens should be sent for routine histopathological examination. (C) 2011 Baishideng. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3748/wjg.v17.i15.1961
dc.identifier.endpage1970en_US
dc.identifier.issn1007-9327
dc.identifier.issn2219-2840
dc.identifier.issue15en_US
dc.identifier.pmid21528073
dc.identifier.startpage1961en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i15.1961
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/19313
dc.identifier.volume17en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000290179000004
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBaishideng Publishing Group Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofWorld Journal of Gastroenterology
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectAppendicitisen_US
dc.subjectCarcinoiden_US
dc.subjectUnusual Findingsen_US
dc.subjectGoblet Cell Carcinoiden_US
dc.subjectEnterobius Vermicularisen_US
dc.subjectMucoceleen_US
dc.titleUnusual histopathological findings in appendectomy specimens: A retrospective analysis and literature reviewen_US
dc.titleUnusual histopathological findings in appendectomy specimens: A retrospective analysis and literature review
dc.typeReview Articleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu