REOPERATIONS IN CHILDREN WITH ANORECTAL MALFORMATIONS

The aim of the study was to assess the possibility of using a surgical approach – anterior sagittal anoproctoplasty in children who had previously been operated with various techniques for anorectal malformations.

Material and methods. The analysis of postoperative results was performed using a scale for assessing the long-term results of treatment of anorectal malformations before and after surgery. A retrospective study of the patients who was previously operated for various forms of anorectal malformations for the period from 2016 to 2019 in pediatric surgery department of State Novosibirsk district hospital was performed. The early and long-term outcomes were assessed.

Results. The criteria for repeated surgical treatment were: rectal mislocated outside of the sphincter mechanism, low social adaptation, secondary changes from the perineum and external genital organs. After investigation (identification of the sphincter mechanism using a myostimulator, irrigoscopy, MRI or MSCT of the pelvic organs), all patients underwent surgical correction – the anterior sagittal anoproctoplasty. Postoperative results were assessed using Holschneider score. The results obtained in the course of this study indicate the possibility of using this method of surgical treatment.

Discussion. Children previously underwent surgery for anorectal malformations but having severe functional disorders in the anorectal region, are a complex group of patients who must be determined specific criteria for the reoperations need. The efficiency of surgical treatment depends on the presence of associated congenital malformations (myelodysplasia, pathology of the sacrum and tailbone), as well as the severity of cicatricial changes in the sphincter mechanism. Surgical intervention in 33.3 % of cases led to satisfactory and in 66.7 % of cases to good results.  

1. Vinokurova N.V., Tsap N.A. An integrated approach to the treatment of anorectal malformations in children. Vestnik Ural’skogo gosudarstvennogo meditsinskogo universiteta = Bulletin of the Ural State Medical University. 2018; (1): 18–20. [In Russian].

2. Geraskin A.V., Dronov A.F., Smirnov A.N. Pediatric coloproctology: A guide for physicians. Moscow: Kontent, 2012. 664 p. [In Russian].

3. Ionov A.L., Shcherbakova O.V., Luka V.A., Makarov S.P., Andreev E.S., Mikheev M.Yu., Myzin A.V. The structure of postoperative complications in children with malformations of the colon and anorectal region. Detskaya bol’nitsa = Children’s hospital. 2010; (2): 19–27. [In Russian].

4. Brandt M.L., Daigneau C., Graviss E.A., NaikMathuria B., Fitch M.E., Washburn K.K. Validation of the Baylor Continence Scale in children with anorectal malformations. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2007; 42 (6): 1015–1021. doi 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2007.01.070

5. De Blaauw I., Midrio P., Breech L., Bischoff A., Dickie B., Versteegh H.P., Peña A., Levitt M.A. Treatment of adults with unrecognized or inadequately repaired anorectal malformations: 17 cases of rectovestibular and rectoperineal fistulas. J. Pediatr. Adolesc. Gynecol. 2013; 26 (3): 156–160. doi 10.1016/j.jpag.2012.12.003

6. Fábio Dória do Amaral. Treatment of anorectal anomalies by anterior perineal anorectoplasty. J. Pediatr. Surg. 1999; 34 (9): 1315–1319. doi 10.1016/S0022-3468(99)90001-5

7. Gangopadhyay A.N., Pandey Vaibhav, Gupta D.K., Sharma S.P., Vijayendar Kumar, Verma Ashish. Assessment and comparison of fecal continence in children following primary posterior sagittal anorectoplasty and abdominoperineal pull through for anorectal anomaly using clinical scoring and MRI. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2016; 51(3): 430–434. doi 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2015.09.003

8. Hassett S., Snell S., Hughes-Thomas A., Holmes K. 10-year outcome of children born with anorectal malformation, treated by posterior sagittal anorectoplasty, assessed according to the Krickenbeck classification. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2009; 44 (2): 399–403. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2008.10.092

9. Lane V.A., Skerritt C., Wood R.J., Reck C., Hewitt G.D., McCracken K.A., Jayanthi V.R., DaJusta D., Ching C., Deans K.J., Minneci P.C., Levitt M.A. A standardized approach for the assessment and treatment of internationally adopted children with a previously repaired anorectal malformation (ARM). J. Pediatr. Surg. 2016; 51 (11): 1864–1870. doi 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2016.07.018

10. Lawrence M.R. The failed anoplasty: Successful outcome after reoperative anoplasty and sigmoid resection. J. Pediatr. Surg. 1999; 33 (7): 1145–1148. doi 10.1016/S0022-3468(98)90548-6

11. Nam S.H., Kim D.Y., Kim S.C. Can we expect a favorable outcome after surgical treatment for an anorectal malformation? J. Pediatr. Surg. 2016; 51 (3): 421–424. doi 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2015.08.048

12. Pena A., Grasshoff S., Levitt M. Reoperations in anorectal malformations. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2007; 42 (2): 318325. doi 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2006.10.034

13. Pinter A.B., Hock A., Vastyan A., Farkas A. Does the posterior sagittal approach with perirectal dissection impair fecal continence in a normal rectum? J. Pediatr. Surg. 1996; 31 (10): 1349–1353. doi 10.1016/S0022-3468(96)90825-8