Intraluminal duodenal “windsock” diverticulum
Case Report and discussion
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54361/ljmr.v15i2.02Keywords:
Diverticulum, Duodenal DiseasesAbstract
Intraluminal duodenal diverticulum (IDD) is a rare developmental anomaly usually found in the second portion of the duodenum. The cause appears to be a failure of recanalization of the occluded foregut lumen of the human embryo, resulting in a fenestrated mucosal membrane [1]. A small aperture in this diaphragm will gradually cause it to elongate caudally in response to duodenal peristalsis to form the so called “wind-sock” configuration. Symptoms are nonspecific and generally depend on the degree of duodenal obstruction; 25% of cases are associated with GI bleeding. In most documented cases, IDD was diagnosed radiologically, but the value of endoscopy for diagnosis and treatment has been amply demonstrated
Downloads
References
Bargon, G.: Angebroene Membranstenosen in Duodenum Beim Erwachsenenmit Intraduodenaler (Intraluminarer) Pseudodiverticikelbildung. Fortschr. Geb. Roentgenstr. Nuklearmed., 100:319, 1964.
Coors, G. A. and Mitchum, W. R.: Intraluminal Duodenal Diverticulum. Am. J. Surg., 103:400, 1962.
Meyer, A. G., and Edgren, D. C.: Duodenal Obstruction by an Intraluminal Diverticulum. Arch. Surg., 103:1, 1956.
Zatzkin, H. R., Macy, J. J., Kveton, F. W.: Intraluminal Duodenal Diverticulum: Report of a Case: Am. J. Roentgenol. Radium Ther. Nucl. Med., 103:326, 1968.
Zoepf T, Zoepf DS, Arnold JC, Benz C, Riemann JF. The relationship between juxtapapillary duodenal diverticula and disorders of the biliopancreatic system: analysis of 350 patients. GastrointestEndoscop2001; 54:56-61
D’Alessio MJ, Rana A, Martin JA, Moser AJ. Surgical management of intraluminal duodenal diverticulum and coexisting anomalies. J Am Coll Surg 2005; 201:143-148
Coors, G. A., and W. R. Mitchum. 1962. Intraluminal duodenal diverticulum. Amer. J . Roentgen. 103: 400 402.
Nelson, W. 1. 1947. Congenital diaphragm of the duodenum. Case report with pre-operative x-ray studies. Minnesota Med. 30: 745-742.
Lorente S, Lanas A, Aznar C, Jiménez E, Lozano R. Recurrent digestive hemorrhage as a complication of an intraduodenal diverticulum. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1999; 22:282---5.
Harthun NL, Morse JH, Shaffer HA et al: Duodenal obstruction caused by intraluminal duodenal diverticulum and annular pancreas in an adult. GastrointestEndosc 2002; 55:940-943
Van Os EC, Petersen BT, Kelly DG et al: Endoscopic management of an intraluminal duodenal diverticulum. GastrointestEndosc 1996; 44:494-497.
Willemer S, Hans D, Johann FB, Rudolf A. Recurrent acute pancreatitis and intraluminal duodenal diverticulum. Pancreas. 1992; 7:257–61.
Clemente G, G Gerardo ADR, Nuzzo G. Intramural duodenal diverticulum mimicking a periampullary neoplasm. Am J Surg. 2008; 196:31–2.
Mathieu B, Salducci J, Remacle J-P, Pin G, Monges H. Intraluminal duodenal diverticulum. Am J Dig Dis. 1978;23: S1---5.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Salem Asselhab, Malik Alkhanfas, Mahdi Alsakloul, Maryam Abuojaylah, Ibrahim Altomi (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Open Access Policy
Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR).is an open journal, therefore there are no fees required for downloading any publication from the journal website by authors, readers, and institution.
The journal applies the license of CC BY (a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license). This license allows authors to keep ownership f the copyright of their papers. But this license permits any user to download , print out, extract, reuse, archive, and distribute the article, so long as appropriate credit is given to the authors and the source of the work.
The license ensures that the article will be available as widely as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific archive.
Editorial Policy
The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR). It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editorial, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
Any manuscript or substantial parts of it, submitted to the journal must not be under consideration by any other journal. In general, the manuscript should not have already been published in any journal or other citable form, although it may have been deposited on a preprint server. Authors are required to ensure that no material submitted as part of a manuscript infringes existing copyrights, or the rights of a third party.
Authorship Policy
The manuscript authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution and intellectual input to the research submitted to the journal, including design, performance, interpretation of the reported study, and writing the manuscript. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the manuscript but without intellectual input should only be recognized in the acknowledgements section of the manuscript. Also, one of the authors should be selected as the corresponding author to communicate with the journal and approve the final version of the manuscript for publication in the LJMR.
Peer-review Policy
- All the manuscripts submitted to LJMR will be subjected to the double-blinded peer-review process;
- The manuscript will be reviewed by two suitable experts in the respective subject area.
- Reports of all the reviewers will be considered while deciding on acceptance/revision or rejection of a manuscript.
- Editor-In-Chief will make the final decision, based on the reviewer’s comments.
- Editor-In-Chief can ask one or more advisory board members for their suggestions upon a manuscript, before making the final decision.
- Associate editor and review editors provide administrative support to maintain the integrity of the peer-review process.
- In case, authors challenge the editor’s negative decision with suitable arguments, the manuscript can be sent to one more reviewer and the final decision will be made based upon his recommendations.
