Outcome of males with high anorectal malformations treated with laparoscopic-assisted anorectal pull-through: preliminary results of a comparative study with the open approach in a single institution.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of males with HARM treated with a laparoscopic-assisted anorectal pull-through compared with the open posterior sagittal approach in a single institution. METHODS: This study includes 32 patients: 17 (9 with a rectoprostatic fistula [RPF] and 8 with a rectovesical fistula [RVF]) who underwent laparoscopic-assisted anorectal pull-through from October 2001 onward and 15 (8 with an RPF and 7 with an RVF) treated by posterior sagittal approach before that date. Patients were reviewed retrospectively but were operated on by the authors and had longitudinal follow-up. Parameters analyzed included associated anomalies, sacral ratio (SR) index, age at surgery, operative time, complications, presence of voluntary bowel movements, constipation, and soiling. A good outcome was determined by absent or grade 1 soiling and a poor outcome result by soiling grades 2 and 3. RESULTS: Mean age at surgery was 22 and 37.5 months for patients with RPF and RVF, respectively, in the laparoscopic group and 29.2 and 25.7 months in the open group. Operative time was significantly shorter (P < .0036) for the laparoscopic RVF repair compared with the open approach. In patients with RPF, 50% in the laparoscopic (L) and 37.5% in the open (O) approach had an SR below 0.6. Fifty percent of all patients with RVF had an SR below 0.6, making groups comparable in terms of evaluating bowel function. Four patients were excluded in the analysis of functional results. Voluntary bowel movements with previous defecatory sensation were present in 83.l3% (5/6) in L vs 87.5% (7/8) in O patients with RPF and 62.5% (5/8) L vs 50% (3/6) in O patients with RVF. Grade 1 soiling was present in 50% (3/6) vs 62.5% (5/8) of patients with RPF and 37.5% (3/8) vs 16% (1/6) of patients with RVF in the L and O groups, respectively. Soiling grade 2 or 3 was present in 50% (3/6) vs 12.5% (1/8) of patients with RPF and 37.5% (3/8) vs 50% (3/6) of patients with RVF in the L and O groups, respectively. The risk of poor outcome was 61% in the group with SR lower than 0.6 vs 13% in the group with a higher ratio. By stratifying the groups according to type of surgery or anatomical type, these results were maintained. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach is a reasonable surgical option for the management of HARM. Laparoscopic approach was less time consuming in patients with RVF without impairing functional results.

Laparoscopic treatment of rectovaginal fistulas. Feasibility, technical details, and functional results of a rare anorectal malformation.

INTRODUCTION: Rectovaginal fistulas are a rare variety of anorectal malformations. Eight patients with this anomaly among 420 children with anorectal malformations were treated in our center. We used a laparoscopic approach in 5 of the children. The aim of this study is to define the feasibility and technical details of laparoscopy in the treatment of these patients as compared with those treated by posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP) and to evaluate the preliminary results. METHODS: Three patients were treated with a PSARP starting February 2000 (group 1 [GI]). The laparoscopic approach (laparoscopic treatment [LT]) was used in the next 5 girls starting in November 2002 (group 2 [G2]). All patients were operated on by the authors. In LT cases, we used 3 ports. The rectum was dissected laparoscopically, and the fistula was transected. An assisted anorectal pull-through was then performed using a minimal perineal incision. Clinical features, age at operation, associated anomalies, ratio/sacrum (sacral ratio [SR]), distal colostogram, operative findings, complications, urinary continence, voluntary bowel movements, constipation, soiling, and requirements of bowel management program were analyzed. Patients older than 3 years and 6 months and with more than 3 months after colostomy closure were included in the analysis of functional results. RESULTS: The mean age at the time of operation was 21.8 months. Urogenital anomalies were seen in 6 (75%) of the 8 girls. Two patients had SRs less than 0.6. Only 3 patients in each group were considered for evaluation of functional results. Mean age was 67 months in 3 (G1) and 64 months in 3 (G2) patients. All 6 patients were continent of urine. Only 1 in G1 had an SR less than 0.6. Voluntary bowel movements were present in 1 patient in G1 and 2 in G2. One patient in G1 had severe constipation and grade 2 soiling requiring bowel management program (SR <0.6), and 1 patient in G2 had occasional soiling. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy allowed an optimal view of the pelvis and helped to achieve a low dissection of the fistula. Although the number of patients in this study is few, functional results with LT seem to be comparable to the open PSARP approach when done by experienced pediatric surgeons. The laparoscopic approach may be considered as an option for the treatment of this rare anomaly.