Rectal Prolapse After Laparoscopically Assisted Anorectoplasty for Anorectal Malformations

Cutting-Edge Pediatric Colorectal Surgery: A Half-Century of Innovations in Technique which have Transformed Care for Anorectal Malformation

The field of pediatric colorectal surgery has been transformed over the last 50 years with innovations that have dramatically improved surgical techniques, reduced complications, and improved patients' lives. Specific to anorectal malformations (ARMs), an innovative operation for their repair, the posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP), came in the 1980s and was relatively new compared to other operations for congenital problems which were mostly developed in the 1950s. Since that major advance, further cutting-edge surgical techniques have been developed and are reviewed here.

Anorectal prolapse after anorectal reconstruction: Incidence and risk factors according to the ARM-Net Consortium

AIM

There is a knowledge gap regarding which patients with anorectal malformations (ARMs) are at highest risk of anorectal prolapse (AP), and which risk factors predispose to AP in ARM. The aims of the study were to define the frequency of AP after ARM reconstruction, and explore risk factors.

METHOD

Data from the ARM-Net registry inserted between 2007 and 2023 were used. Inclusion criteria were the reconstruction performed, no stoma at 1-year follow-up and all data available at 1-year follow-up. The statistics used were univariable and multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

After exclusions the incidence of AP was 163 in 1117 patients (14.6%) in data inserted by 31 centres from 12 countries. The AP incidence was unevenly distributed between the centres (interquartile range 6.3%-21.7%). AP was more frequent in boys than girls (20.9% vs. 8.1%; P < 0.001). In both sexes the incidence of AP was higher in complex ARM subtypes (P < 0.001). AP was most frequent after laparotomy- and laparoscopic-assisted reconstructions (50.0% and 37.5%, respectively). Spinal and sacral anomalies constituted risk factors for AP in univariable analyses, while tethered cord did not. Adjusted risk factors for AP were severity of ARM subtype (40% in long-channel cloaca and bladder neck fistula, OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.0-10.2), laparotomy-assisted posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (50%, OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6-8.4) and larger neo-anus at 1-year follow-up (Hegar 13.6 vs. 13.1; OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4). Constipation was not a risk factor for AP.

CONCLUSION

Anorectal prolapse is a frequent postoperative sequela. Adjusted analyses indicate that severity of ARM, abdominal open access during reconstruction and larger size of anus are risk factors.

Laparoscopic-assisted distal colon excision and proximal colon pull-through anorectoplasty for anorectal malformation

Purpose

During the second stage surgery for anorectal malformations (ARM), patients whose distal intestine of the colostomy is particularly short underwent laparoscopic-assisted distal colon excision and proximal colon pull-through anorectoplasty (PCPARP). This study aimed to discuss the outcomes of PCPARP after colostomy in patients with ARM.

Methods

This is a single-center propensity score-matched (PSM) study which was retrospectively initiated patients with intermediate- or high-type ARM who underwent laparoscopic surgery from June 2007 to December 2018. These patients were divided into PCPARP group and conventional laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty (LAARP) group according to specific surgical methods. The general data, surgical data, postoperative complications, and functional results were evaluated.

Results

In total, 216 patients were included in this study: 190 (88.0%) undergoing LAARP approach and 26 (12.0%) undergoing PCPARP approach. After PSM, two well-balanced groups of 26 patients were analyzed and showed the postoperative complications (P = 0.126) and bowel function (P = 0.809) were similiar between the two groups.

Conclusions

The curative effect of PCPARP after colostomy is similar to that of classic LAARP surgery, which can be used for ARM patients with a very short and abnormal distal intestine of the stoma.

[Treatment of rectal prolapse after proctoplasty in a child with rectal atresia]

Rectal prolapse is a common disease in childhood and observed mainly at the age of 1-4 years old (95% of cases). If conservative treatment is ineffective, surgical correction of rectal prolapse in children without previous anorectal surgery is performed at the age of over a year. There is a single report on examination of patients aged 4-16 years after surgical correction of anorectal malformations with postoperative rectal prolapse. We present diagnosis and successful surgical treatment of rectal prolapse in an infant who underwent previous perineal proctoplasty for fistulous form of anorectal malformation.

Laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty for anorectal malformation with rectobulbar fistula: A two-center comparative study with posterior sagittal anorectoplasty

Due to the controversy on the feasibility of laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty (LAARP) for the treatment of the anorectal malformation (ARM) with rectobulbar fistula (RBF), this study aimed to compare the outcomes of LAARP and posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP) for ARM with RBF. Demographic data, postoperative complications, and bowel function of RBF patients who underwent LAARP and PSARP at 2 medical centers from 2016-2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Eighty-eight children with RBF were enrolled, including 43 in the LAARP group and 45 in the PSARP group. There were no significant differences in the sacral ratio (P = .222) or sacral agenesis (P = .374). Thirty-seven and 38 patients in the LAARP and PSARP groups were followed up for a median of 4.14 years. The postoperative complications were comparable between the groups (P = .624), with no cases of urethral diverticulum. The urination of all cases was normal and no evidence of cyst formation was found on MCU or MRI during the follow-up period. The incidence of rectal prolapse was similar between the 2 groups (9.3% vs 17.8%, P = .247). The groups had equivalent Bowel Function Score (15.29 ± 2.36 vs 15.58 ± 2.88, P = .645), but the LAARP group had better voluntary bowel movement (94.6% vs 84.2%, P = .148) by Krickenbeck classification. The intermediate-term outcomes of LAARP show that the urethral diverticulum was rare by the intraluminal incision of the fistular and the bowel function was comparable to that of PSARP in ARM with rectobulbar fistula. However, LAARP was associated with smaller perineal wounds.

Rectal Prolapse Following Repair of Anorectal Malformation: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Management

BACKGROUND

The incidence and optimal management of rectal prolapse following repair of an anorectal malformation (ARM) has not been well-defined.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed utilizing data from the Pediatric Colorectal and Pelvic Learning Consortium registry. All children with a history of ARM repair were included. Our primary outcome was rectal prolapse. Secondary outcomes included operative management of prolapse and anoplasty stricture following operative management of prolapse. Univariate analyses were performed to identify patient factors associated with our primary and secondary outcomes. A multivariable logistic regression was developed to assess the association between laparoscopic ARM repair and rectal prolapse.

RESULTS

A total of 1140 patients met inclusion criteria; 163 (14.3%) developed rectal prolapse. On univariate analysis, prolapse was significantly associated with male sex, sacral abnormalities, ARM type, ARM complexity, and laparoscopic ARM repairs (p < 0.001). ARM types with the highest rates of prolapse included rectourethral-prostatic fistula (29.2%), rectovesical/bladder neck fistula (28.8%), and cloaca (25.0%). Of those who developed prolapse, 110 (67.5%) underwent operative management. Anoplasty strictures developed in 27 (24.5%) patients after prolapse repair. After controlling for ARM type and hospital, laparoscopic ARM repair was not significantly associated with prolapse (adjusted odds ratio (95% CI): 1.50 (0.84, 2.66), p = 0.17).

CONCLUSION

Rectal prolapse develops in a significant subset of patients following ARM repair. Risk factors for prolapse include male sex, complex ARM type, and sacral abnormalities. Further research investigating the indications for operative management of prolapse and operative techniques for prolapse repair are needed to define optimal treatment.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective cohort study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopically assisted anorectoplasty versus conventional procedures for anorectal malformation: a retrospective nationwide database study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopically assisted anorectoplasty (LAARP) and conventional procedures (CPs) for anorectal malformation (ARM) using a national inpatient database in Japan.

METHODS

Using the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database, we identified patients who underwent anorectoplasty for high- or intermediate-type ARMs from 2010 to 2019. Primary outcomes were postoperative rectal prolapse, anal stenosis, and general complications. Secondary outcomes were the duration of anesthesia and length of hospital stay. We performed 1:2 propensity score-matched analyses to compare the outcomes between the LAARP and CP groups.

RESULTS

We identified 1005 eligible patients, comprising 286 and 719 patients who underwent LAARP and CP, respectively. The propensity score-matched groups included 281 patients with LAARP and 562 with CP. The LAARP group showed a higher proportion of rectal prolapse (21.4% vs. 8.5%; odds ratio, 2.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.89-4.48; p < 0.001) and longer duration of anesthesia (462 min vs. 365 min; difference, 90 min; 95% CI 43-137; p < 0.001) than the CP group. No significant differences were found in other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

LAARP had worse outcomes than CP in terms of rectal prolapse. Thus, we propose that LAARP may require technical refinement to improve patient outcomes.

Hemi-circumferential mucosal resection and anastomosis procedure for rectal prolapse following anorectoplasty for anorectal malformations

PURPOSE

Rectal prolapse after radical surgery for anorectal malformations (ARMs) is a common postoperative complication that causes bleeding and stenosis, and sometimes requires surgical treatment. Different surgical techniques have been reported, but most are associated with high recurrence rates and a long postoperative stay. We performed the hemi-circumferential mucosal resection and anastomosis procedure (HCMR) to preserve anal muscle and anal function. Here, we report the success of our minimally invasive surgical approach to correct rectal prolapse in patients with ARMs.

METHODS

The subjects of this retrospective review were patients who underwent HCMR for rectal prolapse after radical surgery for ARMs between January, 2014 and August, 2021. HCMR involves rectal mucosal resection without muscle plication.

RESULTS

A collective 15 HCMR procedures were performed in 10 patients. The median age at repair was 1.8 years (range, 10 months-18 years). The median operation time and postoperative length of stay were 46 min (range, 17-85 min) and 3 days (range, 1-7 days), respectively. The median postoperative observation period was 3 years 4 months (range, 8 months-7 years 10 months) and no complications or recurrences were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

HCMR is a safe and effective surgical treatment for rectal prolapse after radical operation for ARMs, which is minimally invasive and preserves rectal muscle and function.

Adolescent Psychosis and Rectal Prolapse

Psychosis is a constellation of symptoms that present with a disconnect from reality. The duration, severity, and presentation of symptoms can present on a wide spectrum, and etiologies can vary from patient to patient. Psychosis is also associated with self-injurious thinking, behavior, and suicidality. Long-term treatment of psychosis with antipsychotics can often result in side effects like constipation, sedation, dry mouth, and metabolic syndrome. Though rectal prolapse is uncommon in adolescent patients, there was a noted correlation with rectal prolapse in adult patients that were treated for chronic psychiatric disease. We report a case of a 17-year-old female with psychosis and rectal prolapse, who was admitted for inpatient treatment.

Pattern of anatomic disorder and surgical management of anorectal prolapse in anorectal malformation

AIM

Due to the paucity of data and controversy regarding the etiology and surgical approach for managing anorectal prolapse (ARP) after anorectoplasty, we sought to investigate the underlying anatomic disorder and the surgical outcome in managing this challenging complication.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study on 83 patients with ARP related to anorectal malformations (ARM). Logistic regression analyses were performed to detect the risk factors for the ARP severity. Surgical procedures were stratified according to identified anatomical abnormalities and surgical outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

50 patients (62.7%) had high-type ARM. The original anorectoplasty had a higher rate of ARP in laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty (n = 49, 59.0%) versus posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (n = 11, 13.3%). ARP was associated with rectal fat hyperplasia (67.5%), dilated muscular tunnel (79.5%), longitudinal muscle (LM) discontinuity (16.9%), rectal dilation (22.9%), mislocated anus (7.2%), and excessive mobile mesorectum (3.6%). Based on the ARP severity, the patients were divided into a severe group (Group 1, n = 38) and a moderate group (Group 2, n = 45). Binary logistic regression analysis showed that hyperplasia rectal fat (OR 4.55, 95% CI 1.16-17.84), rectal dilation (OR 4.21, 95% CI 1.05-16.94), and high-type ARM (OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.14-7.39) were independent risk factors for the development of severe ARP. Complications after stratified surgical repair included wound infection in six patients (7.2%), anal stenosis in one patient (1.2%), and ARP recurrence in two patients (2.4%). Twenty-six patients without colostomy before prolapse repair were followed up for 2 to 12 years. All the patients maintained voluntary bowel movements. Following ARP repair, there was an overall higher rate of no soiling or grade 1 soiling (88.5 vs. 65.4%), but 3 of 12 patients with grade 2 constipation were upgraded to grade 3.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that ARM-related anorectal prolapse is associated with excessive rectum, hyperplasia of rectal fat, mobile mesorectum, loose muscular tunnel, LM discontinuity, and anal mislocation. Surgical repair with techniques stratified according to the patients' underlying risk factors is effective to prevent recurrence and improve the soiling continence.

Long-term outcomes of male imperforate anus with recto-urethral fistula: laparoscopy-assisted anorectoplasty versus posterior sagittal anorectoplasty

PURPOSE

A five-parameter fecal continence evaluation questionnaire (FCEQ) and incidence of complications were used for long-term assessment of laparoscopy-assisted anorectoplasty (LAARP) and posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP) for treating male imperforate anus (MIA) with rectobulbar (RB) or rectoprostatic (RP) fistulas.

METHODS

Subjects were 64 consecutive Japanese MIA patients with RB or RP fistulas treated at a single institution between 1995 and 2021. FCEQ data collected retrospectively were used to calculate a fecal continence evaluation (FCE) score (best = 10) and coefficient of variation for FCE (FCECV). The statistical significance threshold was defined at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Fistulas were RB (n = 40; LAARP = 25/40, PSARP = 15/40) or RP (n = 24; LAARP = 17/24, PSARP = 7/24). Mean ages at surgery and status of the sacrum were similar (p = 0.06, 0.05 and 0.51). FCE scores in RP-LAARP were consistently higher with less FCECV but differences were only statistically significant from 7 years postoperatively (p < 0.05). While FCE scores for RB-LAARP and RB-PSARP were similar (p = 0.99), FCECV were lower for RB-LAARP compared with RB-PSARP. LAARP was associated with less-wound infections, but greater incidence of anal mucosal prolapse unrelated to preoperative status of the sacrum.

CONCLUSION

Long-term postoperative FCEQ assessment favored LAARP for treating MIA with either RB or RP fistulas.