Literature DB >> 29370894

Continence after posterior sagittal anorectoplasty for anorectal malformations: comparison of different scores.

Giulia Brisighelli1, Francesco Macchini2, Dario Consonni3, Antonio Di Cesare4, Anna Morandi5, Ernesto Leva6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate bowel function in patients with anorectal malformations (ARM) comparing existing scoring systems.
METHODS: Parents of ARM patients treated at our institution were asked to fill in Holschneider, Kricknebeck, and Rintala questionnaires. Scores obtained from the questionnaires were expressed per cent and analyzed depending on the age and type of ARM according to Krickenbeck classification. Patients younger than 3 years of age or with developmental delay were excluded.
RESULTS: Eighty patients (42 males: 52%) were included. Median age was 7.6 years (range 3-22). Twenty eight patients (35%) had perineal fistula, 13 (16%) bulbar, 7 (9%) prostatic, 5 (6%) rectobladder neck, 15 (19%) vestibular, 7 (9%) had a cloaca and 5 (6%) imperforate anus without fistula. Using Holschneider, Krickenbeck, and Rintala, average scores were respectively 72, 71 and 73 (p = 0.4 with ANOVA). Using the three questionnaires patients with perineal fistula scored 82, 76 and 84 respectively (p = 0.003), with bulbar 70, 71, 73 (p = 0.8), with prostatic 52,69,59 (p = 0.06), with bladder neck 56, 80, 57 (p = 0.004), with vestibular 75,67,75 (p = 0.02), with cloaca 64, 67, 65 (p = 0.9), and with imperforate anus without fistula 61,49, 53 (p = 0.12). Patients from 3 to 6 years of age scored 74,72 and 76 (p = 0.37), from 7 to 12: 70,71 and 71 (p = 0.87), and older than twelve: 74,66 e 73 (p = 0.08).
CONCLUSION: The scores obtained using Holschneider, Rintala, and Krickenbeck questionnaires are significantly lower with increasing severity of the ARM. For each type of ARM there are some differences in the results obtained using the three questionnaires. In general, Krickenbeck and Peña questionnaires tend to give lower scores in patients with ARMs that have good prognosis, and higher scores for ARMs with poor prognosis. Age is not significantly related to the score obtained. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III TYPE OF STUDY: Diagnostic study.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anorectal malformation; Bowel function; Constipation; Fecal incontinence; Scores; Soiling

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29370894     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2017.12.020

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


  4 in total

1.  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

2.  Cardiorespiratory performance and locomotor function of patients with anorectal malformations.

Authors:  Christoph Arneitz; Jana Windhaber; Christina Flucher; Paolo Gasparella; Eva Amerstorfer; Andrea Huber-Zeyringer; Christoph Castellani; Georg Singer; Holger Till
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-09-23       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Fecal Incontinence after Posterior Sagittal Anorectoplasty for Anorectal Malformation: A Single-Center Study.

Authors:  Manoochehr Ghorbanpoor; Behzad Dehvan; Siavash Rahimi; Azar Pirdehghan
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2018-05-30

4.  Anorectal malformation patients' outcomes after definitive surgery using Krickenbeck classification: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Firdian Makrufardi; Dewi Novitasari Arifin; Dwiki Afandy; Dicky Yulianda; Andi Dwihantoro
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2020-02-20
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.