| Literature DB >> 35292861 |
Chiyoshi Toyama1, Motonari Nomura1, Yuko Tazuke1, Chisato Yokota2, Naoki Kagawa2, Haruhiko Kishima2, Akihiro Yoshimura3, Takeshi Ujike3, Akira Nagahara3, Norio Nonomura3, Tateki Kubo4, Futoshi Matsui5, Fumi Matsumoto5, Hiroomi Okuyama6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pygopagus is a type of conjoined twin binding at the buttocks. Some cases of pygopagus involve the fusion of the gastrointestinal tract, urinary tract, and spinal cord. Few cases of male pygopagus have been reported; however, the prognosis after separation is unclear. Herein, we report a case of male pygopagus in which successful separation was performed with the reconstruction of the anal canal. CASEEntities:
Keywords: Anal canal; Conjoined twin; Pygopagus
Year: 2022 PMID: 35292861 PMCID: PMC8924340 DOI: 10.1186/s40792-022-01398-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Surg Case Rep ISSN: 2198-7793
Fig. 1Physical exams before the twins underwent surgical separation. a General appearance, b fused anus with one anal aperture, c fused scrotum with four testes, d fused penis with one urethra
Fig. 2Preoperative image findings and the 3D model. Preoperative image of a a fused spinal cord detected by MRI (arrow), b separated rectums detected by a gastro-graphin enema. c Other intra-abdominal organs have no connection, d the 3D model was created for multidisciplinary discussion
Fig. 3Separation with anal canal and urethral reconstruction. Operative findings: a fused spinal cord, b fused anus, c fused penis. d The fused penis and urethra were divided into two pairs of bodies, and the urethral plate and penile skin were sutured with Byar’s flap to wrap the penises. e The sphincter muscle complex and puborectalis were fused partially and reconstructed, giving each patient one-half of the sphincter muscles
Fig. 4General appearance after separation of the pygopagus patient. Follow-up physical examination: a the patients stand by themselves. b Their scars are clear, and c external urethral orifice (arrow) and anal aperture are shown
Male pygopagus conjoined twins
| Author (year) | Operative timing | Age at operation | Shared organ | Outcome | Urinaryfunction | Defecation | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spinal cord | Intestine | Urinary tract | |||||||
| 1 | Luce (1956) | Elective | 17 days | Dural sac | NA | NA | Both survived | NA | NA |
| 2 | Ventura (1998) | Elective | 2 days | No | No | No | Both survived | NA | NA |
| 3 | Leelanukrom (2004) | Elective | 6 months | NA | Rectum Anus | External Genitalia | Both survived | NA | NA |
| 4 | Gohary (2009) | Elective | 19 months | Dural sac | Rectum Anus | External Genitalia | Both survived | A: Good B: Neuropathic bladder | A: GoodB: Soiling at night |
| 5 | Saguil (2009) | Emergent | 2 days | NA | Rectum Anus | External Genitalia | Both dead | – | – |
| 6 | Our cases | Elective | 6 months | Dural sac | Anus | External Genitalia | Both survived | A: GoodB: Good | A: GoodB: Good |
NA not available