T Meyer1, M Maier, S Höller, M Fein. 1. Chirurgische Universitätsklinik und Poliklinik, Würzburg. meyer_t@chirurgie.uni-wuerzburg.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: According to autoptic studies, accessory spleens may be found in 10-15% of the population and most of them are usually located at or near the splenic hilum. Only in 1-2% they are located in the pancreatic tail. We report a rare case of intrapancreatic accessory spleen which radiologically mimicked a tumor in the tail of the pancreas. PATIENT: A 54-year-old man was diagnosed with a tumor at the pancreatic tail. In the preoperative computed tomography (CT), there was a lesion (2.6 cm in diameter) in the pancreatic tail and two locoregional lesions (1 and 1.5 cm in diameter), which had intensive contrast enhancement. The diagnosis of a nonfunctioning endocrine pancreatic tail carcinoma with lymph node metastasis was made. RESULTS: Intraoperative examination showed two accessory spleens nearby the pancreatic tail. As pancreatic cancer could not be excluded because of the local findings, an oncological left pancreatectomy was performed. Histological examination excluded cancer and revealed an intrapancreatic accessory spleen and two accessory spleens nearby the pancreatic tail. CONCLUSION: Intrapancreatic accessory spleen should be included in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasm.
BACKGROUND: According to autoptic studies, accessory spleens may be found in 10-15% of the population and most of them are usually located at or near the splenic hilum. Only in 1-2% they are located in the pancreatic tail. We report a rare case of intrapancreatic accessory spleen which radiologically mimicked a tumor in the tail of the pancreas. PATIENT: A 54-year-old man was diagnosed with a tumor at the pancreatic tail. In the preoperative computed tomography (CT), there was a lesion (2.6 cm in diameter) in the pancreatic tail and two locoregional lesions (1 and 1.5 cm in diameter), which had intensive contrast enhancement. The diagnosis of a nonfunctioning endocrine pancreatic tail carcinoma with lymph node metastasis was made. RESULTS: Intraoperative examination showed two accessory spleens nearby the pancreatic tail. As pancreatic cancer could not be excluded because of the local findings, an oncological left pancreatectomy was performed. Histological examination excluded cancer and revealed an intrapancreatic accessory spleen and two accessory spleens nearby the pancreatic tail. CONCLUSION: Intrapancreatic accessory spleen should be included in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasm.