Incidental splenic lesions in a complex surgical patient: a diagnosis and management dilemma

Authors

  • D. Vulpe University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, FL, USA Author https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9486-5871
  • H. Kaseb University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, FL, USA; Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, FL, USA Author
  • V. Neychev University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, FL, USA; Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, FL, USA Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2478/AMB-2026-0060

Keywords:

splenic adhesions, incidental splenic lesions, partial splenectomy, robotic surgery

Abstract

Abstract. Introduction: Incidental splenic lesions discovered during unrelated imaging often require additional radiological workup for defining differential diagnosis. This conventional framework may be inadequate for suspicious splenic capsule lesions encountered during unrelated surgery, which pose a diagnostic and management challenge. Case presentation: A 41-year-old female was found to have papular capsular splenic lesions during robotic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy that was not addressed during the procedure. The patient subsequently underwent a robotic partial splenectomy due to concern for malignancy. Histopathology report revealed benign splenic parenchyma with capsular adhesions. Discussion: Capsular splenic lesions are rare findings during abdominal surgeries and thus may pose diagnostic and management dilemma. In such cases, laparoscopic or robotic-assisted partial splenectomy can provide a safe and effective diagnostic tool while preserving splenic function. Conclusion: This case highlights the importance of including splenic adhesions in the differential for atypical splenic lesions.

References

Kim N, Auerbach A, Manning MA. Algorithmic Approach to the Splenic Lesion Based on Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation. Radiogr, 2022;42(3):683-701.

Valizadeh P, Jannatdoust P, Tahamtan M, et al. Differentiating malignant from benign splenic lesions: a meta-analysis and pictorial review of imaging features. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2024;49(8):2833-2857.

Abrishami A, Khalili N, Kooraki S, et al. Evaluation of cross-sectional imaging features that aid in the differentiation of benign and malignant splenic lesions. Eur J Radiol, 2021;136:109549.

Stratakis K, Kalogiannis E, Thanopoulos A, et al. Mechanisms and therapeutic approaches for peritoneal adhesions: a comprehensive review. Chirurgia (Bucur), 2023;118(2):113-126.

Sommer T. Colonic obstruction caused by adhesive splenomegaly: report of a case. Dis Colon Rectum, 2004;47(10):1738-1739.

Espinal EA, Hoak T, Porter JA, et al. Splenic rupture from colonoscopy: a report of two cases and review of the literature. Surg Endosc, 1997;11(1):71-73.

Brüggmann D, Tchartchian G, Wallwiener M, et al. Intra-abdominal adhesions: definition, origin, significance in surgical practice, and treatment options. Dtsch Arztebl Int, 2010;107(44):769-775.

Herrick SE, Mutsaers SE, Ozua P, et al. Human peritoneal adhesions are highly cellular, innervated, and vascularized. J Pathol, 2000;192(1):67-72.

Kristinsson SY, Gridley G, Hoover RN, et al. Long-term risks after splenectomy among 8,149 cancer-free American veterans: a cohort study with up to 27 years follow-up. Haematologica, 2014;99(2):392-398.

Downloads

Published

10.06.2026

How to Cite

Vulpe, D., Kaseb, H., & Neychev, V. (2026). Incidental splenic lesions in a complex surgical patient: a diagnosis and management dilemma. Acta Medica Bulgarica, 53(2), 55-58. https://doi.org/10.2478/AMB-2026-0060

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 > >> 

Similar Articles

1-10 of 98

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.