Splenic abscess is a rare but potentially life-threatening condition that can rupture, leading to pneumoperitoneum and symptoms that mimic gastrointestinal perforation in rare cases. This can significantly complicate accurate diagnosis and prompt treatment. A splenic abscess can become life-threatening by rupturing, which may cause diffuse peritonitis or sepsis.

A 68-year-old man with uncontrolled diabetes presented with fever, chills, and abdominal pain. Initial evaluation at a previous hospital, including computed tomography (CT), suggested a lower gastrointestinal perforation, leading to his transfer to our facility. CT revealed a non-enhancing lesion with gas in the spleen and free intraperitoneal air; however, there was no clear evidence of gastrointestinal perforation. An emergency exploratory laparotomy was performed, which revealed purulent ascites and a ruptured splenic abscess without any gastrointestinal perforation. After thorough lavage to eliminate contamination, open abdominal management was initiated owing to a need for catecholamine support and an inability to completely rule out the possibility of gastrointestinal perforation. A second-look laparotomy confirmed that there was no further contamination or gastrointestinal tract perforation. Blood and abscess cultures revealed Escherichia coli, leading us to initiate targeted antibiotic therapy. The patient recovered successfully and was discharged on postoperative day 40 without any recurrence. Ruptured splenic abscess with pneumoperitoneum is rare and poses significant diagnostic challenges, particularly in patients with diabetes, owing to its clinical similarity to gastrointestinal perforation. This study highlights the utility of exploratory laparotomy and staged open abdominal management when gastrointestinal perforation cannot be ruled out.

Physicians should consider ruptured splenic abscesses in patients with pneumoperitoneum, particularly those with diabetes. Exploratory laparotomy with staged open abdominal management may represent an effective approach that facilitates safe monitoring and targeted treatment, thereby reducing the risk of fatal complications.

A 29-year-old man with diabetic nephropathy presented with fever and chills 4 days postdischarge following hospitalization for hyperglycemia. Abdominal computed tomography revealed a splenic abscess. Percutaneous drainage was performed, and intravenous meropenem was administered. Subsequent culture of the drained abscess identified Lancefieldella rimae. Based on the antimicrobial susceptibility results, the patient was switched to oral levofloxacin. This combined treatment led to the resolution of the abscess, with no recurrence after 6 months. This is the first case of a splenic abscess caused by L. rimae successfully managed by prompt percutaneous drainage and appropriate antibiotics.

Spleen abscess is a rare and serious condition. Splenectomy and imaging-guided percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) are the methods used in the treatment, but there is still a debate about the appropriate treatment for the patient.

The results of 16 patients treated for spleen abscesses in our clinic between 2012 and 2021 were reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups according to splenectomy and PCD.

In the study, PCD was performed in 11 patients (68.75%), but three of these patients required splenectomy due to inadequate drainage. The patients who underwent splenectomy were significantly younger than the patients who underwent PCD (p < 0.05). One patient underwent PCD and 2 patients underwent splenectomy after PCD died.

Spleen abscess is a serious clinical picture that requires a multidisciplinary approach and is life-threatening. New clinical studies are needed for a treatment algorithm that will provide good results.

Splenic abscess is relatively rare in clinical practice as an invasive disease. However, during the continuous prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the incidence rate of splenic abscess showed an upward trend. However, because the etiology of splenic abscess is not specific, it is easy to be covered by the respiratory symptoms of COVID-19, resulting in omission or delay in diagnosis. If splenic abscesses cannot be treated in a timely manner, the mortality rate can reach 100%. Therefore, it is important to fully understand the correlation between COVID-19 and the development of splenic abscesses.

A female patient, 71 years of age, was admitted to our hospital because of cough and sputum for 1 week and fever for 2 days. According to the positive results of novel coronavirus nucleic acid and chest computed tomography, novel coronavirus pneumonia was diagnosed. On the 4th day after treatment, abdominal distension and vomiting were observed. Abdominal ultrasound indicated splenomegaly and mixed echo masses in the spleen and abdominal computed tomography indicated 2 new round low-density lesions were found in the spleen.

The patient was diagnosed with secondary splenic abscess after COVID-19 infection.

The patient and her family members refused to undergo ultrasound-guided splenic puncture drainage and splenectomy. In terms of treatment, she was given meropenem combined with vancomycin to continue anti-infection treatment.

The patient's body temperature and infection indicators gradually increased, and the scope of splenic abscess continued to expand. The infection worsened and progressed to septic shock. The patient abandoned rescue drugs and invasive treatment, and died on the 9th day after admission.

This case introduces the clinical characteristics of secondary splenic abscess caused by COVID-19 from the aspects of etiology, disease course, clinical manifestations, auxiliary examinations, and treatment methods. The focus is on improving the understanding of clinical doctors about secondary splenic abscesses caused by COVID-19, providing reference for early diagnosis and timely treatment.

A splenic abscess is rare after trauma, and it has been reported with high mortality rates. Treatment options include antibiotics, percutaneous pigtail drain, or surgical intervention; however, there are no specific guidelines for the treatment of splenic abscesses in trauma settings. We report a 69-year-old male who came in with a splenic abscess after angioembolisation for a splenic laceration after having a right hemicolectomy. Our case presents new information and current recommendations for the management of splenic abscesses based on a comprehensive literature review.

Splenic abscess is a rare condition that generally results from hematogenous spread and affects individuals with hemoglobinopathies or immunocompromising conditions. Although optimal management has recently been under contention, this condition was traditionally managed with splenectomy. We present a rare case of a 58-year-old male with chronic pancreatitis that developed a splenic abscess via a contiguous spread of a pancreatic pseudocyst. His condition was complicated by septic shock. The splenic abscess was managed with antibiotics, image-guided percutaneous drainage, and notably without surgical intervention.

A splenic abscess is a rare disease found in less than 1% of all autopsy studies. Several different diseases are associated as a predisposing factor, such as septic bacteremia due to endocarditis or diverticulitis, previous splenic trauma, immunosuppressive medication or diseases. The reported mortality in the literature is up to 24.5% in correctly diagnosed and treated cases. The diagnostic work-up primarily comprises sonography and computed tomography as well as a percutaneous puncture for determination of the pathogen. In most cases, a percutaneous interventional drainage treatment is sufficient and a splenectomy is necessary only in refractory cases.

Splenic abscess is a rare disease, with incidence of 0.2-0.7% in previous studies. It often appears with left upper quadrant abdominal pain, fever, chills. Splenic abscess often happens because of hematogenous spreading of infections, endocarditis, angioembolization and some other rare reasons. Treatment relies on one of these two methods: percutaneous drainage or surgery.

A 68-year-old diabetic Asian female (Asian woman) presented with generalized abdominal pain, low blood pressure, tachycardia, fever, lethargy and elevated level of blood sugar. She had history of conservative therapy in intensive care unit due to blunt abdominal trauma and splenic injury. She had a huge splenic abscess in ultrasonography and computed tomography scan so she went under splenectomy. Our patient had a splenic abscess without performing any intervention like angioembolization.

Immune compromised patients who are selected for nonoperative management after splenic injury need close follow up and evaluating about abscess formation for at least 2 weeks. Early diagnosis and treatment with two methods including percutaneous drainage or splenectomy should be considered and it depends on patient's risk factors, vital signs, general conditions and presence or absence of sepsis.

In 2017, the World Society of Emergency Surgery published its guidelines for the management of adult and pediatric patients with splenic trauma. Several issues regarding the follow-up of patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM remained unsolved.

Using a modified Delphi method, we sought to explore ongoing areas of controversy in the NOM of splenic trauma and reach a consensus among a group of 48 international experts from five continents (Africa, Europe, Asia, Oceania, America) concerning optimal follow-up strategies in patients with splenic injuries treated with NOM.

Consensus was reached on eleven clinical research questions and 28 recommendations with an agreement rate ≥ 80%. Mobilization after 24 h in low-grade splenic trauma patients (WSES Class I, AAST Grades I-II) was suggested, while in patients with high-grade splenic injuries (WSES Classes II-III, AAST Grades III-V), if no other contraindications to early mobilization exist, safe mobilization of the patient when three successive hemoglobins 8 h apart after the first are within 10% of each other was considered safe according to the panel. The panel suggests adult patients to be admitted to hospital for 1 day (for low-grade splenic injuries-WSES Class I, AAST Grades I-II) to 3 days (for high-grade splenic injuries-WSES Classes II-III, AAST Grades III-V), with those with high-grade injuries requiring admission to a monitored setting. In the absence of specific complications, the panel suggests DVT and VTE prophylaxis with LMWH to be started within 48-72 h from hospital admission. The panel suggests splenic artery embolization (SAE) as the first-line intervention in patients with hemodynamic stability and arterial blush on CT scan, irrespective of injury grade. Regarding patients with WSES Class II blunt splenic injuries (AAST Grade III) without contrast extravasation, a low threshold for SAE has been suggested in the presence of risk factors for NOM failure. The panel also suggested angiography and eventual SAE in all hemodynamically stable adult patients with WSES Class III injuries (AAST Grades IV-V), even in the absence of CT blush, especially when concomitant surgery that requires change of position is needed. Follow-up imaging with contrast-enhanced ultrasound/CT scan in 48-72 h post-admission of trauma in splenic injuries WSES Class II (AAST Grade III) or higher treated with NOM was considered the best strategy for timely detection of vascular complications.

This consensus document could help guide future prospective studies aiming at validating the suggested strategies through the implementation of prospective trauma databases and the subsequent production of internationally endorsed guidelines on the issue.