Left transverse loop colostomy versus high sigmoid loop colostomy for high-type anorectal malformations: Early outcome analysis

Background: High sigmoid (divided) colostomy has been recommended by various studies for the management of high-type anorectal malformation (ARM). It is postulated to be associated with fewer complications. Aims: To compare the complications related to left transverse loop colostomy and high sigmoid...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sharanabasappa Gubbi, Rahul Gupta, Arun K Gupta, Arvind K Shukla
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2018-01-01
Series:Journal of Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.jdrntruhs.org/article.asp?issn=2277-8632;year=2018;volume=7;issue=4;spage=249;epage=253;aulast=Gubbi
Description
Summary:Background: High sigmoid (divided) colostomy has been recommended by various studies for the management of high-type anorectal malformation (ARM). It is postulated to be associated with fewer complications. Aims: To compare the complications related to left transverse loop colostomy and high sigmoid loop colostomy done in male patients with high-type ARM and share our experience. Materials and Methods: A prospective study on all male neonates admitted with high-type ARM at our high-volume tertiary care institute from January 2014 to March 2016 was carried out. The patients were randomized and divided into two groups (group A: left transverse loop colostomy and group B: high sigmoid loop colostomy). The patient's clinical presentation, operative course, and complications were recorded. Results: Of 158 male neonates who were subjected to loop colostomy, 93 (58.9%) were in group A and 65 (41.1%) in group B. Mortality was higher in group B (16.9%) than group A (8.6%), but none directly related to the type of colostomy. Intraoperative complications (technical difficulties) such as difficulty in approaching the sigmoid colon with dilated small bowel loops and identifying the proximal and distal parts of sigmoid colon along with handling of the bowel (including serosal tears) were significantly more in group B (20%) than group A (1.07%) where transverse colon was easily exteriorized. The average time taken for the procedure, pericolostomy excoriation, and bowel obstruction was more in group B when compared with group A. Conclusion: Left transverse loop colostomy works well to relieve the obstruction and is less time-consuming, particularly with late presentation. We recommend left transverse loop colostomy in cases of high-type male ARM because of the ease of procedure and comparatively low complication rates.
ISSN:2277-8632