You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 14, Issue 8
  • Enterocutaneous fistula resulting from the drainage of a contained appendiceal perforation secondary to a partially obstructing low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Case report
Enterocutaneous fistula resulting from the drainage of a contained appendiceal perforation secondary to a partially obstructing low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasm
  1. Ryan Cohen1,2,3,
  2. Katie McKean3 and
  3. Stephanie Chetrit3
  1. 1School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  2. 2School of Medicine, The University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia
  3. 3Colorectal Surgery, St John of God Health Care Inc, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Dr Ryan Cohen; ryan.cohen{at}research.uwa.edu.au

Abstract

We report a case of an enterocutaneous fistula resulting from drainage of a contained appendiceal perforation secondary to an obstructing appendiceal mucinous neoplasm. A 66-year-old otherwise healthy female patient proceeded to laparoscopic appendicectomy with resection of the fistula tract. Histopathology demonstrated a mid-appendiceal mucinous neoplasm, with a benign enterocutaneous fistula tract communicating with the distal, non-malignant portion of the appendix. We provide an overview of the literature and highlight the need to consider appendiceal mucinous neoplasm as a differential in the management of spontaneous right iliac fossa collections and fistulae.

  • general surgery
  • pathology

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2021-244546

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors SC conceived of the presented idea. KM and RC collated the primary data. KM created the initial draft. RC completed manuscript revisions. All authors discussed the manuscript and contributed and reviewed the final manuscript.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.