Two cases of double gall bladder
- 27 Downloads
Comments And Summary
When a clinical diagnosis of a diseased gall bladder has not been verified by cholecystography, the following theoretical possibilities might occur: In the first situation, operation reveals a diseased gall bladder which is removed; an anomaly is not thought of; a supernumerary viscus may still be present, and may be entirely overlooked. If the accessory organ should be diseased the results would be serious. In the second situation, a normal gall bladder is found at operation in its conventional site. Again an anomaly is not thought of. An accessory gall bladder may therefore still be the seat of trouble. The cases of Wischnewsky and Braun demonstrate some of these points; neither case was X-rayed pre-operatively, in both the bladders were separated from each other, one being normal, the other diseased. Fortunately both organs were revealed at operation.
On the other hand, if cholecystography is performed it should be borne in mind that since a diseased gall bladder may coexist with a normal accessory gall bladder, the former may not be visualized, while the latter would reveal a normal sequence.
This finding might lead to a wrong negative diagnosis, with the result that an unsuspected active lesion might be overlooked. In short, the possibility of an accessory gall bladder should always be borne in mind both pre-operatively and post-operatively.
KeywordsDuodenal Ulcer Gall Bladder Cystic Duct Gall Bladder Disease Scarlet Fever
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Boyden, E. A.:Am. J. Roent., 33:689, 1935.Am. J. Anat., 38:177, 1926.Google Scholar
- 2.Braun, A.:Zentrabl. f. Chir., 53:1055, 1926.Google Scholar
- 3.Braunschweig, W.: Cholecystographic Demonstration of Double Formation in Man.Roentgenpraxis, 5:594–596, Aug., 1933.Google Scholar
- 4.Bryan, L.: Double Gall Bladder, Case.Radiology, 35:242, Aug.. 1940.Google Scholar
- 6.Climan, M.: Duplication of Gall Bladder Demonstrated by Cholecystography.Med. J. and Rec., 130:73–74, July 17, 1929.Google Scholar
- 7.Corachan, M., Figueras, I. and Faixat, F.: Un caso de vejiga biliar doble diagnosticado radiologicamente.Rev. de Cirugia de Barcelona, 4:241–248, Oct., 1932.Google Scholar
- 8.Croudace. W. H. H.: Double Gall Bladder: Case.Brit. Med. J., 1:707, April 25, 1931.Google Scholar
- 9.Garafalo, F.: Double Gall Bladder; Case.Bull. d. Sc. Med., 5:380–385, Sept.Oct., 1927.Google Scholar
- 10.Graham, et al: Diseases of the Gall Bladder and Bile Ducts. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia, 1928.Google Scholar
- 11.Gross, R. E.: Congenital Anomalies: Review of 148 Cases with Report of a Double Gall Bladder.Arch. Surg., 32:131–162, Jan., 1936.Google Scholar
- 12.Hayes, R.: Double Gall Bladder; with Double Cystic Duct; Case.Radiology, 16:66–67, Jan., 1931.Google Scholar
- 13.Herrmann, S. F., Hicks, G. S. and Martin, D. L.: Double Gall Bladder; Case.Arch. Surg., 27:905–909, Nov., 1933.Google Scholar
- 16.Meyer, A. W.: Double Gall Bladder; Case.Deutsche Ztsch. of Chir., 211:404–405, 1928.Google Scholar
- 17.Millbourn. E.: Double Gall Bladder, with Report of 2 Cases.Acta Clin. Scandinav., 84:97–123, 1940.Google Scholar
- 18.Minim, N. I.: Double Gall Bladder.Vestnik Khir. (Nos. 70–71) 24:261–265, 1931.Google Scholar
- 19.Pertina, E.: Double Gall Bladder and Double Cystic Duct with Stone in One of Cystic Ducts; Case.Policlinico (Sez. prat.), 37:1416–1417, Sept. 29, 1930.Google Scholar
- 21.Sasmor, D.: Personal communication.Google Scholar
- 23.Stohr, R.: Pathology of Double Gall Bladder; Case.Zentralbl. f. Chir., 61:2202–2203, Sept. 22, 1934.Google Scholar
- 28.Wischnewsky, A. W.: Double Gall Bladder, Discovered During Operation, (Removal of Diseased Supernumerary Bladder).Arch, f. Klin. Chir., 135:779–781, 1925.Google Scholar