| Literature DB >> 27251520 |
Okechukwu Hyginus Ekwunife1, Eric Okechukwu Umeh2, Jideofor Okechukwu Ugwu1, Uzoamaka Rufina Ebubedike2, Chinedu Christian Okoli1, Victor Ifeanyichukwu Modekwe1, Kelechi Collins Elendu2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In children with high and intermediate anorectal malformation, distal colostography is an important investigation done to determine the relationship between the position of the rectal pouch and the probable site of the neo-anus as well as the presence or absence of a fistula. Conventionally, this is done using contrast with fluoroscopy or still X-ray imaging. This, however, has the challenges of irradiation, availability and affordability, especially in developing countries. This study compared the accuracy of trans-perineal ultrasound-guided pressure augmented saline colostomy distension study (SCDS) with conventional contrast distal colostography (CCDC) in the determination of the precise location of the distal rectal pouch and in detecting the presence and site of fistulous communication between the rectum and the urogenital tract was studied.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27251520 PMCID: PMC4955457 DOI: 10.4103/0189-6725.181703
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Afr J Paediatr Surg ISSN: 0974-5998
Figure 1Saline colostomy distension study sonogram of different types of anorectal malformation. (a) Recto-urethral fistula (arrow; red: Urinary bladder, blue: Urethra, green: Fistulous track, yellow: Rectal pouch). (b) Recto-vestibular fistula (red: Vestibule, blue: Uterus, green: Rectal pouch). (c) Rectal atresia without fistula (yellow: Distended rectum tapering at site of anorectal malformation, red: Site of metallic marker, blue: Minimal fluid within urinary bladder
Figure 2Contrast radiographic colostogram (red arrow: Distal colon/rectal pouch, blue arrow: Fistulous track, green arrow: Minimal contrast at region of the bladder neck
Figure 3Intraoperative Pouch skin distance measurement
Type of malformation (intra-operative finding)
| Malformation type | Frequency |
|---|---|
| Rectovesical fistula | 2 |
| Recto bulbar fistula | 4 |
| Vestibular fistula Pouch | 2 |
| No fistula | 4 |
| Cloaca | 1 |
| Total | 13 |
Patients and measurements
| Patient number | Pouch-skin distance (cm) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| SCDS | CCDC | Intra-operative | |
| 1 | 4.2 | 5.2 | 6.0 |
| 2 | 5.0 | 5.4 | 6.5 |
| 3 | 2.6 | 2.4 | 2.5 |
| 4 | 2.5 | 2.9 | 2.5 |
| 5 | 2.6 | 3.5 | 2.4 |
| 6 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.5 |
| 7 | 5.0 | 5.4 | 5.0 |
| 8 | 2.7 | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| 9 | 2.3 | 3.7 | 3.0 |
| 10 | 2.8 | 2.2 | 3.0 |
| 11 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.3 |
| 12 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
| 13 | 3.5 | 3.3 | 6.5 |
CCDC: Conventional contrast distal colostography; SCDS: Saline colostomy distension study
Comparison of pouch-anal skin distance values from intra-operative measurement, SCDS and CCDC using paired t-test
| Comparison | Paired differences | df | Significant (two-tailed) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | SEM | 95% CI of the difference | |||||
| Lower | Upper | |||||||
| Pair 1 | ||||||||
| Intra-operative versus SCDS | 0.5923 | 1.0218 | 0.2834 | −0.0252 | 1.2098 | 2.090 | 12 | 0.059 |
| Pair 2 | ||||||||
| SCDS versus CCDC | 0.2385 | 0.6252 | 0.1734 | −0.1394 | 0.6163 | 1.375 | 12 | 0.194 |
CCDC: Conventional contrast distal colostography; SCDS: Saline colostomy distension study; SD: Standard deviation; SEM: Standard error of mean; CI: Confidence interval
The ability to detect the presence or absence of co-existing fistula
| Statistical test | SCDS* (%) | CCDC** (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | 37.5 | 50.0 |
| Specificity | 80.0 | 100 |
| Accuracy | 53.8 | 69.2 |
| Negative predictive value | 44.4 | 55.6 |
| Positive predictive value | 75.0 | 100 |
Intraoperative measurements were used as the reference test. *SCDS: Ultrasound-guided saline colostomy distension study; **CCDC: Conventional contrast distal colostography