[Pneumothorax Following Gastric Endoscopic Mucosal Resection]

Splenic rupture following endoscopic mucosal resection: A case report and literature review

RATIONALE

This study aims to highlight the rare but severe complication of splenic rupture following colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), advocating for increased vigilance during procedures near the splenic flexure.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We present a case report of a 66-year-old woman who experienced persistent abdominal pain after undergoing EMR for an adenomatous lesion in the distal transverse colon.

DIAGNOSES

The diagnosis of splenic rupture was established following her symptoms and clinical evaluation.

INTERVENTIONS

Active conservative management was implemented after diagnosis.

OUTCOMES

The patient's recovery underscores the importance of prompt diagnosis and careful monitoring.

LESSONS

Although splenic rupture after EMR is extremely rare, it is a serious and potentially life-threatening complication. When obtaining informed consent, it is important to emphasize not only common complications like bleeding and perforation but also the risk of splenic injury. Physicians should select appropriate instruments and carefully adjust the angle and force of needle insertion, avoiding excessively long needles and vertical insertion. The procedure should be performed gently to minimize the risk of splenic rupture. For lesions near the splenic flexure, if postoperative abdominal pain occurs, regardless of left shoulder pain, splenic rupture should be considered, and a computed tomography scan promptly performed. Postoperatively, physicians should closely monitor vital signs and repeatedly check blood counts and coagulation parameters. Treatment should be tailored to the splenic injury's extent and the patient's overall condition, with immediate surgery if necessary. High-risk patients should be regularly followed up and instructed to monitor for physical changes. Endoscopists should remain vigilant during procedures, fully understanding potential complications, and closely monitoring the patient's condition postoperatively. This vigilance is key to preventing severe complications and ensuring optimal outcomes.

The Value of Gastric Cancer Staging by Endoscopic Ultrasonography Features in the Diagnosis of Gastroenterology

This research was aimed at exploring the application value of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in the diagnosis of gastric cancer staging and the correlation between staging and clinical features of gastric cancer. A total of 72 patients with gastric cancer were selected and randomly divided into two groups. The patients in the pathological group underwent postoperative pathological examination, while those in the EUS group received preoperative EUS examination. The results showed that the staging accuracy of EUS was 73.33% for T1, 78.57% for T2, 27% for T3, and 100% for T4, compared with the pathological staging. The accuracy of N- and N+ was 42.5% and 82.3% in EUS, respectively, and the total accuracy was 55.7%. There was no considerable difference in the accuracy of T staging between early gastric cancer and advanced gastric cancer (P > 0.05), but there was a considerable difference in N staging (P < 0.05). Lymph node metastasis affected the accuracy of N staging (P < 0.05). The number and location of metastatic lymph nodes did not affect the judgment of metastatic lymph nodes (P > 0.05). In addition, the proportion of understaging and overstaging was greatly different among different lesion sizes and histological types of gastric cancer (P < 0.05). To sum up, the accuracy of EUS for T and N staging of gastric cancer needed to be improved. The location of gastric cancer lesions affected the accuracy of T staging, while the depth of invasion and lymph node metastasis affected the accuracy of N staging.