The site of the Media Sphera Publishers contains materials intended solely for healthcare professionals.
By closing this message, you confirm that you are a certified medical professional or a student of a medical educational institution.

Baca Camacho

Antenor Orrego Private University

G. Centurión-Jáuregui

Antenor Orrego Private University

Castillo Del

Antenor Orrego Private University

K.P. Lozano

Antenor Orrego Private University

C.Z. Corvera

Antenor Orrego Private University

Perforation of Meckel’s diverticulum by a fishbone

Authors:

Baca Camacho, G. Centurión-Jáuregui, Castillo Del, K.P. Lozano, C.Z. Corvera

More about the authors

Journal: Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery. 2022;(12‑2): 78‑80

Read: 3899 times


To cite this article:

Camacho BacaP, Centurión-Jáuregui G, Del CastilloSoberón, Lozano KP, Corvera CZ. Perforation of Meckel’s diverticulum by a fishbone. Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery. 2022;(12‑2):78‑80. (In Engl.)
https://doi.org/10.17116/hirurgia202212278

Introduction

Meckel’s diverticulum (MD) represents the most common congenital anomaly of the gastrointestinal tract [1]. A prevalence of 2% has been reported in the general population [2] and the lifetime risk of related complications is estimated to be 4—40% [3]. The name was attributed to the German anatomist Johann Friedrich Meckel, who established the embryonic origin in 1809 [4].

Clinically, it may remain silent for life or become complicated and debut as an acute abdomen. Causes may be associated with inflammation and haemorrhage. Other less common presentations are hernia, malignancy or obstruction; some of these may even be life-threatening [5]. Nevertheless, there are other rarer complications such as diverticular perforation by a foreign body [6]. We present a case of a patient with perforation of a MD by an intact fishbone that simulated acute appendicitis who was operated on for this diagnosis.

Case report

The patient was an 18-year-old male, who presented with abdominal pain in the right iliac fossa, of 48 hours’ evolution, of a lying down type, with abrupt onset and increasing intensity and associated with nausea. There was no history of chronic diseases or previous abdominal surgery. On physical examination, the patient had a blood pressure of 100/70 mmHg, heart rate of 66 bpm, axillary temperature of 36.5°C and oxygen saturation of 97%. On abdominal examination, McBurney, Blumberg, Rovsing sign was found. Laboratory analysis revealed a white blood cell count of 15,160 per mm3 (normal range 4,500 to 10,000 per mm3) with 89% neutrophils (normal range 50—75%); haemoglobin, glucose, creatinine and coagulation times within normal ranges. An abdominal ultrasound was performed, which reported scant free fluid and thickening of the intestinal wall of the intestinal loops located in the right lower quadrant; an acute appendicitis was therefore conjectured as a diagnosis, and the patient was scheduled for a laparoscopic appendectomy.

Under laparoscopic vision, a paracecally oriented cecal appendix was identified, with no inflammatory signs; however, the scarce seropurulent free fluid near the cecum attracted attention, so it was decided to perform an incidental appendectomy and exploration of the terminal ileum, from the ileocecal valve upwards. At 50 cm from it, a Meckel’s diverticulum was identified with fibrin adhering to its surface, as well as erythema at the base and a foreign body perforating the diverticulum near its base. It was an intact fishbone (figure). It was decided to convert to open surgery as there was no material available to complete the surgery laparoscopically. The perforated Meckel’s diverticulum was resected and then the ileo-ileal end-to-end anastomosis was performed in 2 planes. The first plane, with 4/0 vicryl, with Schmieden stitches; and the second plane, with 3/0 vicryl, with Lembert stitches. The postoperative period was uneventful. He was discharged after two days; a check-up was carried out at one week and one month, without any complications.

Meckel’s diverticulum perforated by fish bone.

Discussions

MD is caused by incomplete obliteration of the omphalomesenteric duct, which connects the yolk sac to the small intestine, specifically the ileum, in the developing embryo [7]; it is considered the most common congenital anomaly of the gastrointestinal tract, with a prevalence of approximately 2% in the general population [8]. Most MDs are asymptomatic and are discovered incidentally through imaging studies or during abdominal surgery. An Italian study showed an incidental finding of 60% in a sample of 65 patients with MD [9]. An epidemiological study in Taiwan on MD reported that 50% of patients were symptomatic and bowel obstruction was the most common preoperative diagnosis, followed by acute abdominal pain and gastrointestinal bleeding. Bowel obstruction was the most common presenting symptom of MD in the age groups 0—10 years (young children) and >20 years (adults), while acute abdominal pain was most common in the age group 11—20 years (adolescents) [10].

MD historically follows the “rule of two”: 2% frequency, diagnosed mostly in children under 2 years of age, 2 times more frequent in males, located in the small intestine 60 cm from the ileocaecal valve, with a length of up to 5 cm and a diameter of up to 2 cm, with two types of heterotopic mucosa [11, 12]. The cells lining the vitelline canal are pluripotent and, as the MD is a remnant of the vitelline canal, it contains heterotopic gastric tissue (50%), pancreatic tissue (5%) and, more rarely, hepatobiliary tissue and duodenal, colonic, endometrial or Brunner’s glands [13]. The presence of heterotopic tissues results in severe and even fatal complications such as gastrointestinal haemorrhage (31%), inflammation (25%), intestinal obstruction (16%), hernial involvement (11%), intussusception (11%), fistula or umbilical sinus (4%) and tumours (2%) [14].

In relation to the causes of intestinal perforation, fish bones, chicken bones and toothpicks have generally been reported. Other rarer causes are pens, fingernails, nail clippers, batteries and pins [15]. Of these, ingested fish bones are the most common cause of gastrointestinal perforation due to their elongated configuration and sharp tip. In our case, perforation of the MD by a fishbone occurred, probably due to a combination of the peristalsis, the angulation and blind termination of the diverticulum on one side and the linear shape of the fishbone. All this increases the possibility of impaction and perforation.

Patients with foreign body perforation in areas close to the cecum such as the MD will present with acute abdominal pain that simulates, in most cases, acute appendicitis, as was the case here. This is often overlooked in the diagnosis, as it is a rare condition, and they usually do not recall ingestion of fish bones [16]. As a consequence of MD perforation, patients may have different complications, some very mild and self-limited, as in our case, to more severe ones, such as localized abdominal abscess, colorectal, colovesical and enterovesical fistula, inflammatory mass, chronic or acute intestinal obstruction, haemorrhage, among others. In situations other than MD perforation by a foreign body but acute, a delay in diagnosis could reach a mortality of 6%, especially in the elderly [17].

Imaging is limited in making the diagnosis of foreign body perforation of the MD. Plain abdominal radiography has a detection sensitivity of 32%; and abdominal ultrasound has been shown to be useful in the identification of foreign bodies, thanks to its high reflectivity and variable back shadowing [18]. Abdominal CT, among all studies, represents the radiological examination of choice for the detection of foreign bodies and their complications [19]. Radiological findings will show acute and focal inflammatory changes around the site of perforation, as well as thickening of the bowel wall, free fluid and ileus; and, depending on the time course, even self-limiting masses through the omentum or adjacent structures may be evident.

A MD perforated by a foreign body should be treated like any other complication of the diverticulum. There are two surgical interventions: simple diverticulectomy and segmental bowel resection, with subsequent primary anastomosis [17], which is the technique of choice; the latter is reserved for perforated or inflamed cases, as in the present case. On the other hand, there are conventional and laparoscopic surgical interventions [20], both of which are safe, although for the latter, all the necessary logistics for adequate resection and primary anastomosis must be in place.

Conclusions

Perforation of a Meckel’s diverticulum by a fishbone is exceptionally rare and could simulate acute appendicitis. Imaging has its limitations; however, among all of them, abdominal CT, carefully evaluated, leads to a correct preoperative diagnosis. Laparoscopy is a safe diagnostic and also therapeutic procedure to treat complicated Meckel’s diverticulum.

Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial or personal relationships that could be viewed as influencing the work reported in this paper. This work did not receive any grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors

Authorship

All persons listed as authors have been actively involved in one or more key aspects of the reported study. All authors attest that they meet the current International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for Authorship. The full responsibility for the content of this article lies in the authors.

Ethics

All procedures performed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments.

References:

  1. Peranteau WH, Smink DS. Appendix, Meckel’s, and Other Small Bowel Diverticula. In: Zinner MJ, Ashley SW, eds. Maingot’s Abdominal Operations. New York: The McGraw-Hill; 2013 (cited 2022 June 19). https://accesssurgery.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?aid=57013273
  2. Lequet J, Menahem B, Alves A, Fohlen A, Mulliri A. Meckel’s diverticulum in the adult. J Visc Surg (Internet). 2017 Sept (cited 2022 June 19); 154(4):253-259.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28698005
  3. Choi SY, Hong SS, Park HJ, Lee HK, Shin HC, Choi GC. The many faces of Meckel’s diverticulum and its complications. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol (Internet). 2017 Apr (cited 2022 June 19);61(2):225-231.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27492813
  4. Ivatury RR. Meckel’s diverticulum and the eponymous legend. J Trauma Acute Care Surg (Internet). 2019 Aug (cited 2022 June 19);87(2):451-455.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31349351
  5. De la Cruz Ku G, Nelson E, Calderón R, Hemmati P, Kim B. Meckel’s Enterolith Causing Small Bowel Obstruction: A Useful Solution to a Unique Problem. Cureus (Internet). 2021 June (cited 2022 June 19); 13(6):e15934. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34336435
  6. Alves JR, Justino GB, Justino LB, Ternes CMP, Rech JVT, Graffunder FP. Meckel’s Diverticulum Perforation by Foreign Body: A Case Report. Bull Emerg Trauma (Internet). 2021 Apr (cited 2022 June 19);9(2):101-104.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8195832
  7. Wakizaka K, Khor LW, Annen K, Fukushima T, Furuya M, Taketomi A. Meckel’s diverticulum with intraperitoneal hemorrhage in a child detected with screening laparoscopy: A case report. Surg Case Rep (Internet). 2021 Dec (cited 2022 June 19);7(1):264.  https://surgicalcasereports.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40792-021-01347-9
  8. Blevrakis E, Partalis N, Seremeti C, Sakellaris G. Meckel’s diverticulum in paediatric practice on Crete (Greece): A 10-year review. Afr J Paediatr Surg AJPS (Internet). 2011 Dec (cited 2022 June 19);8(3):279-282.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22248889
  9. Tartaglia D, Cremonini C, Strambi S, Ginesini M, Biloslavo A, Paiano L, et al. Incidentally discovered Meckel’s diverticulum: should I stay or should I go? ANZ J Surg (Internet). 2020 Sept (cited 2022 June 19); 90(9):1694-1699. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32783315
  10. Chang Y-C, Lai J-N, Chiu L-T, Wu M-C, Wei JC-C. Epidemiology of Meckel’s diverticulum: A nationwide population-based study in Taiwan: Characteristics of the cases from surgery between 1996 and 2013. Medicine (Baltimore) (Internet). 2021 Dec (cited 2022 June 19);100(50): e28338. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34918715
  11. Bidarmaghz B, McGregor H, Raufian K, Tee CL. Perforation of the Meckel’s diverticulum with a chicken bone: A case report and literature review. Surg Case Rep (Internet). 2019 Feb (cited 2022 June 19);5(1):15.  https://surgicalcasereports.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40792-019-0577-x
  12. Ruscher K, Fisher J, Hughes C, Neff S, Lerer T, Hight D, et al. National trends in the surgical management of Meckel’s diverticulum. J Pediatr Surg (Internet). 2011 May (cited 2022 June 19);46(5):3.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21616248
  13. Kuru S, Kuru S. Meckel’s diverticulum: clinical features, diagnosis and management. Rev Esp Enfermedades Dig (Internet). 2018 Nov (cited 2022 June 19);110(11):726-732.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30032625
  14. Aggarwal L, Jain S, Dev R, Chaudhary L, Sharma D. Meckel’s diverticulum with benign stricture: A very rare cause of intestinal obstruction. Indian J Surg (Internet). 2010 July (cited 2022 June 19);72(Suppl 1):331-332.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3451845/pdf/12262_2010_Article_85.pdf
  15. Masuya R, Okamoto K, Kidogawa H, Kamizono J, Ieiri S. Rare pediatric case of Meckel diverticulum penetration caused by a fish bone. Pediatr Int Off J Jpn Pediatr Soc (Internet). 2019 July (cited 2022 June 19); 61(7):731-733.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31309652
  16. Dimitriou I, Evaggelou N, Tavaki E, Chatzitheoklytos E. Perforation of Meckel’s diverticulum by a fish bone presenting as acute appendicitis: A case report. J Med Case Reports (Internet). 2013 Oct (cited 2022 July 01);7(1):231.  https://jmedicalcasereports.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1752-1947-7-231
  17. Gonçalves A, Almeida M, Malheiro L, Costa-Maia J. Meckel’s diverticulum perforation by a fish bone: A case report. Int J Surg Case Rep (Internet). 2016 Sept (cited 2022 July 01);28:237-240.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5066196
  18. Kolleri JJ, Abdirahman AM, Khaliq A, Abu-Dayeh A, Sajid S, Mirza S, et al. A Case Report on Fish Bone Perforating Meckel’s Diverticulum Mimicking Appendicitis. Cureus (Internet). 2022 Feb (cited 2022 July 01);14(2):e22693. https://www.cureus.com/articles/87589-a-case-report-on-fish-bone-perforating-meckels-diverticulum-mimicking-appendicitis
  19. Kumar D, Venugopalan Nair A, Nepal P, Alotaibi TZ, Al-Heidous M, Blair Macdonald D. Abdominal CT manifestations in fish bone foreign body injuries: What the radiologist needs to know. Acta Radiol Open (Internet). 2021 July (cited 2022 July 01);10(7):1-8.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34377536
  20. Malik AA, Shams-ul-Bari, Wani KA, Khaja AR. Meckel’s diverticulum-Revisited. Saudi J Gastroenterol (Internet). 2010 Jan (cited 2022 July 01); 16(1):3.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3023098

Email Confirmation

An email was sent to test@gmail.com with a confirmation link. Follow the link from the letter to complete the registration on the site.

Email Confirmation

We use cооkies to improve the performance of the site. By staying on our site, you agree to the terms of use of cооkies. To view our Privacy and Cookie Policy, please. click here.