Russell B Hawkins1, Steven L Raymond1, Shawn D St Peter2, Cynthia D Downard3, Faisal G Qureshi4, Elizabeth Renaud5, Paul D Danielson6, Saleem Islam7. 1. University of Florida College of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Gainesville, FL, USA. 2. Children's Mercy Hospital, Kansas City, MO, USA. 3. University of Louisville, Department of Surgery, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Louisville, KY, USA. 4. University of Texas Southwestern, Department of Surgery, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Dallas, TX, USA. 5. Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Department of Surgery, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Providence, RI, USA. 6. Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital, St. Petersburg, FL, USA. 7. University of Florida College of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Gainesville, FL, USA. Electronic address: Saleem.Islam@surgery.ufl.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: The optimal method to repair gastroschisis defects continues to be debated. The two primary methods are immediate closure (IC) or silo placement (SP). The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between each approach using a multicenter retrospective analysis. We hypothesized that patients undergoing SP for ≤5 days would have largely equivalent outcomes compared to IC patients. METHODS: Gastroschisis patient data were collected over a 7-year period. The cohort was separated into IC and SP groups. The SP group was further stratified based on time to closure (≤5 days, 6-10 days, >10 days). Characteristics and outcomes were compared between groups. Multivariate logistic regression was also performed. RESULTS: 566 neonates with gastroschisis were identified including 224 patients in the IC group and 337 patients in the SP group. Among SP patients, 130 were closed within 5 days, 140 in 6-10 days, and 57 in >10 days. There were no significant differences in mortality, sepsis, readmission, or days to full enteral feeds between IC patients and SP patients who had a silo ≤5 days. IC patients had a significantly higher incidence of ventral hernias. Multivariate analysis revealed time to closure as a significant independent predictor of length of stay, ventilator duration, time to full enteral feeds, and TPN duration. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show largely equivalent outcomes between patients who undergo immediate closure and those who have silos ≤5 days. We propose that closure within 5 days avoids many of the risks commonly attributed to delay in closure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II retrospective study.
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: The optimal method to repair gastroschisis defects continues to be debated. The two primary methods are immediate closure (IC) or silo placement (SP). The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between each approach using a multicenter retrospective analysis. We hypothesized that patients undergoing SP for ≤5 days would have largely equivalent outcomes compared to IC patients. METHODS:Gastroschisispatient data were collected over a 7-year period. The cohort was separated into IC and SP groups. The SP group was further stratified based on time to closure (≤5 days, 6-10 days, >10 days). Characteristics and outcomes were compared between groups. Multivariate logistic regression was also performed. RESULTS: 566 neonates with gastroschisis were identified including 224 patients in the IC group and 337 patients in the SP group. Among SP patients, 130 were closed within 5 days, 140 in 6-10 days, and 57 in >10 days. There were no significant differences in mortality, sepsis, readmission, or days to full enteral feeds between IC patients and SP patients who had a silo ≤5 days. IC patients had a significantly higher incidence of ventral hernias. Multivariate analysis revealed time to closure as a significant independent predictor of length of stay, ventilator duration, time to full enteral feeds, and TPN duration. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show largely equivalent outcomes between patients who undergo immediate closure and those who have silos ≤5 days. We propose that closure within 5 days avoids many of the risks commonly attributed to delay in closure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II retrospective study.
Authors: K A Molik; C A Gingalewski; K W West; F J Rescorla; L R Scherer; S A Engum; J L Grosfeld Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: Russell G Witt; Michael Zobel; Benjamin Padilla; Hanmin Lee; Tippi C MacKenzie; Lan Vu Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Emma L Harris; Corrado Minutillo; Susannah Hart; Teresa M Warner; Madhur Ravikumara; Elizabeth A Nathan; Jan E Dickinson Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: Meghan A Arnold; David C Chang; Rosemary Nabaweesi; Paul M Colombani; Melinda A Bathurst; Kyaw S Mon; Soneil Hosmane; Fizan Abdullah Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: Laurens D Eeftinck Schattenkerk; Gijsbert D Musters; David J Nijssen; Wouter J de Jonge; Ralph de Vries; L W Ernest van Heurn; Joep Pm Derikx Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 4.379