A 32-year-old man presented to our department with abdominal pain and fever. In an earlier hospitalization he was diagnosed with periappendicular abscess and treated with antibiotics. Due to fever and ‘non-resolution’ of the abscess and due to its deep location in the lower abdomen, which excluded percutaneous drainage, we elected to operate the patient. A large mass in the cecum accompanied with an abscess resulted in a right hemicolectomy. The pathological examination revealed a desmoid tumor of the cecum. The patient’s recovery was uneventful.

AIM:To elucidate the relationship between clinical presentation and outcome. METHODS:A single institution retrospective chart review of patients admitted with the diagnosis of colon cancer. We used univariate and a multivariate analysis to identify symptoms association with mortality. An odds ratio based clinical score was created to evaluate the contribution of the quality of symptoms to outcome. Primary measure of outcome was survival. RESULTS:During the study period, 236 patients met the inclusion criteria. Overall survival was 60.6%, mean follow-up 3.0 years. A bivariate analysis showed that increasing number of symptoms is not associated with mortality. However, a symptom-specific analysis performed using a logistic regression model controlling for age, stage and the duration of complaints revealed that the presence of melena was independently associated with mortality [P = 0.04, odds ratio (OR) 7.4], while rectal bleeding was associated with survival (P = 0.004, OR 3.9). Applying the proposed clinical score to an receiver operating characteristic curve showed that score > 1 had a strong association with mortality. The same logistic regression model was applied. The results showed that a score > 1 was an independent predictor of mortality (P < 0.001) and associated with nodepositive disease (P = 0.008). CONCLUSION:The quality of symptoms rather than quantity is correlated with outcome among patients with colon cancer. The proposed clinical scoring system may correctly predict the patient's outcome.

No abstract

IntroductionIn pediatric care, the role of focused abdominal sonography in trauma (FAST) remains ill defined. The objective of this study was to assess the sensitivity and specificity of FAST for detecting free peritoneal fluid in children.MethodsThe trauma registry of a single level I pediatric trauma center was queried for the results of FAST examination of consecutive pediatric (<18 years) blunt trauma patients over a period of 36 months, from January 2010 to December 2012. Demographics, type of injuries, FAST results, computerized tomography (CT) results, and operative findings were reviewed.ResultsDuring the study period, 543 injured pediatric patients (mean age 8.2 ± 5 years) underwent FAST examinations. In 95 (17.5 %) FAST was positive for free peritoneal fluid. CT examination was performed in 219 (40.3 %) children. Positive FAST examination was confirmed by CT scan in 61/73 (83.6 %). CT detected intra-peritoneal fluid in 62/448 (13.8 %) of the patients with negative FAST results. These findings correspond to a sensitivity of 50 %, specificity of 88 %, positive predictive value (PPV) of 84 %, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 58 %. In patients who had negative FAST results and no CT examination (302), no missed abdominal injury was detected on clinical ground. FAST examination in the young age group (<2 years) yielded lower sensitivity and specificity (36 and 78 % respectively) with a PPV of only 50 %.ConclusionsThis study shows that although a positive FAST evaluation does not necessarily correlate with an IAI, a negative one strongly suggests the absence of an IAI, with a high NPV. These findings are emphasized in the analysis of the subgroup of children less than 2 years of age. FAST examination tempered with sound clinical judgment seems to be an effective tool to discriminate injured children in need of further imaging evaluation.

No abstract