Appendiceal mucocele is a rare disease. Sometimes it is discovered accidentally and sometimes it resembles acute appendicitis. Correct diagnosis before surgery is very important for the selection of adequate surgical treatment to avoid intraoperative and postoperative complications. Ultrasonography, and particularly computed tomography, should be used extensively for this purpose. If mucocele is treated incorrectly pseudomyxoma peritonei, which is characterized by malignant process, may develop. We present a case of a 54-year-old man who was admitted to the emergency department with the signs of acute appendicitis. Open surgery was performed. At the time of surgery, a cystic mass of the appendix with dimensions 7 3 4 33 cm, with inflamed walls, but without perforation was discovered in the right iliac fossa. No discharge was found in the peritoneal cavity. Diagnosis of mucocele was suspected. Only appendectomy was performed because no pathologic process was found in the base of the appendix and lymph nodes were not increased in size. Hystopathologic diagnosis was mucinous cystadenoma. After 2 years, the patient is feeling well.

BackgroundThe aim of our prospective study is to compare and analyze the results of two treatment methods of appendiceal mass and abscess: emergency surgery and conservative treatment with and without interval surgery.Materials and methods74 Patients with the diagnosis of appendiceal mass or abscess were enrolled in this study. The patients were assigned into two groups: the emergency surgery group and the conservative management group. The conservative management group was subdivided into two groups: interval surgery group and the ambulatory follow-up observation group without interval surgery. Several clinical characteristics were determined and compared between the groups. Among patients who underwent surgery, the surgical methods, operation time, postoperative hospitalization period, and post-surgical complications were analyzed. In the ambulatory follow-up observation group, recurrence of appendicitis was assessed.ResultsComparison of the emergency surgery group and interval surgery group revealed that the interval surgery group was characterized by shorter operation time (P = 0.008), a smallernumber of postoperative complications (P = 0.02) and also shorter postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.009). In the ambulatory follow-up observation group, recurrence of appendicitis developed in 3 (13%) patients. US or CT-guided PCD was performed in all 3 patients on the conservative treatment stage. Comparing the interval surgery and recurrent appendicitis groups revealed statistically significant difference: operation time (P = 0.04) as well as postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.04) were shorter in recurrent appendicitis group. In 3 (4.1%) patients, the cause of the appendiceal mass was caecal cancer (2 cases) and Crohn's disease.ConclusionConservative treatment without interval surgery seems to be the preferred method for treatment of appendiceal mass and abscess. Patients can be operated on only in case of recurrence of appendicitis. US or CT PCD of appendiceal abscess presents the risk-factor for the development of recurrence of appendicitis. CT and colonoscopy within 4–6 weeks after completing the conservative treatment is recommended to be performed in all patients.

Our research shows no significant difference in frequency of hernia recurrence between retromuscular mesh repair and onlay technique for treatment of incisional hernia. The usage of the retromuscular mesh repair is associated with significantly less wound complications than onlay technique. That can be considered as an advantage of retromuscular method, which makes it more preferential than onlay method.

Our research shows no significant difference in wound complications, hernia recurrence and chronic pain after Lichtenstein hernioplasty, by using of LW and HW meshes. The usage of the LW mesh was associated with less feeling of foreign body than that of the HW mesh, what can be considered as prevalence of LW mesh hernioplasty.