These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Meckel's diverticulum. Pro and co routine removal].
    Author: Kapral W.
    Journal: Zentralbl Chir; 1988; 113(6):357-71. PubMed ID: 3291487.
    Abstract:
    The following points are made against the background of experience recorded by the author from 115 cases of Meckel's diverticulum: Active intra-operative search for Meckel's diverticulum continues to be justified in the course of all operations in which such search appears to be practicable without traumatisation of the intestine due to the given surgical access route and which would not imply the risk of germ transmission. It is, of course, necessary to remove any macroscopically changed Meckel's diverticulum. Removal of the macroscopically inconspicuous Meckel's diverticulum is recommended, as well, since grave microscopic pathology may be concealed under the surface and because possible damage would be clearly outweighed by the benefit achieved from removal of an even macroscopically inconspicuous Meckel's diverticulum. Any Meckel's diverticulum accidentally discovered in a patient in somewhat advanced age should be removed, since the author's own experience against reports by other authors is likely to suggest that the rate of diverticular complications is relatively high in advanced age groups. It is absolutely imperative to look for Meckel's diverticulum in all cases in which intra-operative findings are in disagreement with clinical examinations prior to surgery, particularly in cases in which signs of acute appendicitis were pre-operatively recorded, whereas bland appendix was found on surgery.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]