Anal canal duplication in children: a monocentric experience of 12 cases.

PURPOSE: Anal canal duplication is a rare malformation characterized by a second perineal opening positioned behind the anus, which is generally observed at 6 o'clock in the lithotomy position. The purpose was to describe six new cases of anal canal duplication (in addition to our previously reported series of six patients) with the aim of providing further clinical information about this anomaly. METHODS: We described 6 new cases of anal canal duplication in terms of symptoms, anatomical disposition, imaging results, and histopathology. Clinical details of these cases and those already reported (n = 12) were summarized and compared to existing literature. RESULTS: A total of 12 cases were reported over 34 years. 17% of the patients were male, constituting the only subgroup to present a communication with the digestive tract. A single patient, diagnosed at 12 years, was symptomatic. Half of the patients had at least one associated malformation. All patients underwent surgery, either with a posterior sagittal or perineal approach. CONCLUSION: Diagnosis of anal canal duplication should be suspected when a perineal opening positioned behind the anus is present, and necessitates further exploration by a comprehensive clinical examination and imaging. Surgery is always required, typically performed via a posterior sagittal approach. The postoperative course is usually uncomplicated.

Intra-pancreatic distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a common short and long-term prognosis?

The aim of the study was to compare histological features, postoperative outcomes, and long-term prognostic factors after pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. From 2005 to 2017, 188 pancreaticoduodenectomies (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma n = 151, distal cholangiocarcinoma n = 37) were included. Postoperative outcomes were compared after matching on pancreatic gland texture and main pancreatic duct size. Matching according to tumor size, lymph node invasion and resection margin was used to compare overall and disease-free survival. Distal cholangiocarcinoma patients had more often "soft" pancreatic gland (P = 0.002) and small size main pancreatic duct (P = 0.001). Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients had larger tumors (P = 0.009), and higher lymph node ratio (P = 0.017). Severe morbidity (P = 0.023) and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (P = 0.018) were higher in distal cholangiocarcinoma patients. After matching on gland texture and main pancreatic duct diameter, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula was still more frequent in distal cholangiocarcinoma patients (P = 0.007). Tumor size > 20 mm was predictive of impaired overall survival (P = 0.024) and disease-free survival (P = 0.003), tumor differentiation (P = 0.027) was predictive of impaired overall survival. Survival outcomes for distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic ductal cholangiocarcinoma were similar after matching patients according to tumor size, lymph node invasion and resection margin. Long-term outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients are similar. Postoperative course is more complicated after pancreaticoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma than pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. After pancreaticoduodenectomy, patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma have similar long-term oncological outcomes.