1991
DOI: 10.1136/jramc-137-01-12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Is the Diagnosis of Spontaneous Rupture of a Normal Spleen Valid?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They identified four criteria for the diagnosis of spontaneous splenic rupture: (1) on thorough questioning, either prior to operation or in retrospect after operation, there should be no history of trauma or unusual activity that could conceivably injure the spleen; (2) there should be no evidence of disease in other organs that are known to affect the spleen adversely and thereby could cause it to rupture; (3) there should be no evidence of perisplenic adhesions or scarring of the spleen that suggests it has been traumatized or ruptured previously; (4) without findings of hemorrhage and rupture, the spleen should be normal on both gross inspection and histological examination. Crate et al [30] added a fifth criterion: studies of acute-phase and convalescent sera should not show any significant rise in viral antibody titers that are suggestive of recent infection with viruses associated with splenic involvement. The patient, who was accepted with spontaneous splenic rupture, had these five criteria.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They identified four criteria for the diagnosis of spontaneous splenic rupture: (1) on thorough questioning, either prior to operation or in retrospect after operation, there should be no history of trauma or unusual activity that could conceivably injure the spleen; (2) there should be no evidence of disease in other organs that are known to affect the spleen adversely and thereby could cause it to rupture; (3) there should be no evidence of perisplenic adhesions or scarring of the spleen that suggests it has been traumatized or ruptured previously; (4) without findings of hemorrhage and rupture, the spleen should be normal on both gross inspection and histological examination. Crate et al [30] added a fifth criterion: studies of acute-phase and convalescent sera should not show any significant rise in viral antibody titers that are suggestive of recent infection with viruses associated with splenic involvement. The patient, who was accepted with spontaneous splenic rupture, had these five criteria.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 1991, Crate & Payne [3] added a fifth criterion: Full virological studies of acute phase and convalescent sera should show no significant rise in viral antibody titers suggesting recent viral infection of the type associated with splenic involvement.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The review article published by Aubrey-Bassler and Sowers [4] mentioned four case reports of spontaneous rupture of spleen following vomiting [1,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29], and one case report following seizure [20]. There have also been case reports of spontaneous rupture of spleen following colonoscopy, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, hepatic and pulmonary surgery and even emission computed tomography, laparoscopy and hysterectomy [4].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the same review article, they cited 71 cases termed as spontaneous splenic rupture of which only 20 met all of the criteria previously mentioned. Crate and Payne added a fifth criterion: Full virological studies of acute phase and convalescent sera should show no significant rise in antibody titers suggesting recent viral infection of types known to be associated with splenic involvement [23].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%