ArticleInternational journal of surgery case reports2018
Laparoscopic excision of a retroperitoneal completely isolated enteric duplication cyst in an adult male: A case report and review of literature.
Article in International journal of surgery case reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rectal duplication cyst in an adult with a history of imperforate anus: a diagnostic challenge.BMJ case reports · 2022Article
- An adult case of a retroperitoneal isolated enteric duplication cyst with the imaging changes over time.Surgical case reports · 2021Article
- Robotic resection for benign primary retroperitoneal tumors via the transperitoneal approach.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2020Article
- Isolated Colonic Duplication Cyst: An Unusual Cause of Abdominal Pain.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDuplication cysts are very rare congenital malformations in adults. They are lined by gastrointestinal mucosa, connect to the digestive tract, and share smooth muscular layers and a common blood supply. In rare cases, duplication cysts are completely isolated from the digestive tract and have a proper blood supply. Completely isolated duplication cysts in the retroperitoneum are unusual so it is hard to diagnose them without a surgical resection. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 19-year-old male presented at our emergency department with sharp abdominal pain. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography detected a 5-cm multilocular cystic mass located in the retroperitoneum, caudal to the pancreatic body. The cystic mass was safely resected with laparoscopic surgery without any complication. The final pathological diagnosis was an epithelium-lined duplication cyst in the retroperitoneal space. There was no evidence of malignancy in the duplication cyst. Intracystic bleeding was assumed to be the cause of the abdominal pain. DISCUSSION: The most common differential diagnoses of retroperitoneal cystic masses are pseudocysts related to pancreatitis, cysts from surrounding structures, and neoplasms. In this case, the cystic mass was diagnosed as completely isolated duplication cyst after surgical resection. It is very rarely observed in adults, but it should be listed on differential diagnoses because it has some possibility of malignancy.
conclusionA completely isolated duplication cyst is very rare but noteworthy because there is some possibility of malignancy, ulcerative bleeding, and perforation. A surgical resection is recommended for diagnostic treatment. Laparoscopic surgery is favorable for intraoperative inspection and it is minimally invasive.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.