Literature DB >> 10052817

Posterior sagittal anorectoplasty is superior to sacroperineal-sacroabdominoperineal pull-through: a long-term follow-up study in boys with high anorectal anomalies.

R J Rintala1, H G Lindahl.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/
PURPOSE: It is unclear which surgical method offers best long-term functional results in patients with high anorectal anomalies. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term outcome of sacroperineal-sacroabdominoperineal pull-through (SP-SAP) to that of posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP).
METHODS: Only boys with high anorectal anomalies (rectourethral fistula) were included in the study to get fully comparable patient groups. From 1975 to 1987, 36 consecutive patients underwent anorectal reconstruction: 19 had SP-SAP (1975 to 1983) and 17 PSARP (12 with internal sphincter-sparing technique, 1983 to 1987). The late bowel function (age at follow up, SP-SAP, 19 years; range, 15 to 22; PSARP, 13 years; range, 10 to 19) was evaluated by clinical interview and examination, and anorectal manometry.
RESULTS: Six (35%) of the PSARP patients and one (5%) of the SP-SAP patients (P < .04) were always clean without any adjunctive measures. Three PSARP patients and two SP-SAP patients stayed clean with daily enemas. In the PSARP patients with soiling, the median frequency of soiling episodes in a month was four (range, 1 to 16), in the SP-SAP patients, 20 (range, 2 to 28, P < .001). None of the SP-SAP patients but 8 of 17 of the PSARP patients had constipation requiring diet or oral medication. Two PSARP patients and four SP-SAP patients had occasional faecal accidents. The median daily bowel movements in the PSARP group was one (range, one to four) and in the SP-SAP group, three (range, one to five, P < .001). The PSARP patients had significantly higher anorectal resting and squeeze pressures and voluntary sphincter force (cm/H2O, PSARP: mean resting, 47+/-9; mean squeeze, 106+/-29; mean voluntary sphincter force, 60+/-22; SP/SAP: mean resting, 27+/-10; mean squeeze, 68+/-22; mean voluntary sphincter force, 41+/-17; P < .01). Thirteen (76%) of the 17 PSARP patients and none of SP-SAP patients had positive rectoanal reflex indicating functional internal sphincter.
CONCLUSIONS: In boys with high anorectal anomalies, PSARP clearly is superior to sacroperineal and sacroabdominoperineal pull-through in terms of long-term bowel function and faecal continence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10052817     DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3468(99)90203-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pediatr Surg        ISSN: 0022-3468            Impact factor:   2.545


  15 in total

1.  A comparison of clinical protocols for assessing postoperative fecal continence in anorectal malformation.

Authors:  Takanori Ochi; Tadaharu Okazaki; Go Miyano; Geoffrey J Lane; Atsuyuki Yamataka
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.827

2.  Management of anorectal malformations in Varanasi, India: a long-term review of single and three stage procedures.

Authors:  A N Gangopadhyay; S Chooramani Gopal; Shilpa Sharma; D K Gupta; S P Sharma; T Vittal Mohan
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2005-11-29       Impact factor: 1.827

Review 3.  Critical analysis of fecal incontinence scores.

Authors:  Andrea Bischoff; J Bealer; A Peña
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 1.827

4.  Laparoscopic surgical technique to enhance the management of anorectal malformations: 330 cases' experience in a single center.

Authors:  Long Li; Xianghai Ren; Anxiao Ming; Hang Xu; Rui Sun; Yan Zhou; Xuelai Liu; Hailin Sun; Qi Li; Xu Li; Zhen Zhang; Wei Cheng; Mei Diao; Paul K H Tam
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 1.827

5.  The change over time in the postoperative bowel function in male anorectal malformation patients who underwent sacroperineal anorectoplasty and sacroabdominoperineal anorectoplasty.

Authors:  Toshio Harumatsu; Masakazu Murakami; Keisuke Yano; Shun Onishi; Koji Yamada; Waka Yamada; Ryuta Masuya; Takafumi Kawano; Seiro Machigashira; Kazuhiko Nakame; Motoi Mukai; Tatsuru Kaji; Satoshi Ieiri
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 1.827

6.  Comparing the fecal continence scores of patients with anorectal malformation with anorectal manometric findings.

Authors:  Mehmet Mert; Ali Sayan; Gökhan Köylüoğlu
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 1.827

7.  Post-operative magnetic resonance evaluation of children after laparoscopic anorectoplasty for imperforate anus.

Authors:  K K Y Wong; P L Khong; S C L Lin; W W M Lam; L C L Lan; P K H Tam
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2004-08-20       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Single-stage correction of imperforate anus with a rectourethral or a rectovestibula fistula by semi-posterior sagittal anorectoplasty.

Authors:  Shan Zheng; Xianmin Xiao; Yanlei Huang
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2008-04-12       Impact factor: 1.827

9.  Bowel imbrication in the management of anorectal anomalies.

Authors:  P A Dewan; E Elsworthy; M Mathew; O Poki; S L Khaw; K Roberts; A Catto-Smith
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2004-08-07       Impact factor: 1.827

10.  Normal anorectal musculatures and changes in anorectal malformation.

Authors:  Long Li; Xianghai Ren; Hui Xiao; Changlin Wang; Hang Xu; Anxiao Ming; Xueqi Wang; Zheng Li; Mei Diao; Wei Cheng
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2019-10-04       Impact factor: 1.827

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.