Abstract
There are many approaches for surgery of complicated congenital and acquired urogenital anomalies in children with intact rectum. Pena advocates the mid-sagittal division of the sphincter mechanism posterior and anterior to the rectum, along with opening of the posterior and anterior rectal walls. The aim of this study is to determine whether the posterior sagittal approach with perirectal dissection (PSAPD) and elevation of the mobilized rectum would impair fecal continence when used for correction of complicated urogenital anomalies in children with normal rectum. Between 1988 and 1994 the authors performed PSAPD in eight infants and children with an intact anorectum. Indications for PSAPD were high vaginal atresia, Mullerian duct remnants, prostatic rhabdomyosarcoma, and traumatic vesicovaginal fistula. After a mean 10-year follow-up the bowel habits were assessed. Anorectal and uromanometric studies and a detailed questionnaire (modified Holschneider’s scoring) sent to children or parents were evaluated. Three patients who preoperatively were clinically fecal continent had soiling only at the time of diarrhea. Early postoperative low anorectal pressure profile normalized during the follow-up. Seven patients had a fecal continence score above 23, two of them with maximum points of 26. Only one girl had a low score of 15. The authors conclude the PSAPD which offers a few advantages over the sagittal division of the rectum provides an alternative approach for selected lesions of the genitourinary tract in children with a normal rectum. Our results suggest that fecal continence is either preserved or partially affected.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pena A, de Vries PA (1982) Posterior sagittal anorectoplasty: important technical considerations. J Pediatr Surg 17:796–811
Pena A, Filmer B, Bonilla E, Mendez M, Stolar C (1992) Transanorectal approach for the treatment of urogenital sinus: preliminary report. J Pediatr Surg 27:681–685
Pena A, Amroch D, Baeza C, Csury L, Rodriguez G (1993) The effects of the posterior sagittal approach on rectal function (experimental study). J Pediatr Surg 28:773–778
Holschneider A (1977) Elektromanometrie des Enddarmes: Diagnostik der Inkontinenz und Chronische Obstipation. Urban & Schwarzenberg, München-Wien-Baltimore, p 115
Di Benedetto V, Gioviale M, Bagnara V, Cacciaguerra S, Di Benedetto A (1997) The anterior sagittal transanorectal approach: a modified approach to 1-stage clitoral vaginoplasty in severely masculinized female pseudohermaphrodites—preliminary results. J Urol 157:330–332
Domini R, Rossi F, Ceccarelli PL, De Castro R (1997) Anterior sagittal transanorectal approach to the urogenital sinus in adrenogenital syndrome: preliminary report. J Pediatr Surg 32:714–716
Monfort G, Guys JM (1981) Trans-vesical approach to surgery on the prostatic utricle. Chir Pediatr 22:279–284
Pini Prato A, Martuciello G, Torre M, Jassoni V (2004) Feasibility of perineal sagittal approaches in patients without anorectal malformations. Pediatr Surg Int 20:762–767
Pintér AB, Hock A, Vástyán A, Farkas A (1996) Does the posterior sagittal approach with perirectal dissection impair fecal continence in a normal rectum? J Pediatr Surg 31:1349–1353
Yoo SY, Bae KS, Kang SJ, Hwang EH (1995) How important is the role of the internal anal sphincter in fecal continence? An experimental study in dogs. J Pediatr Surg 30:687–691
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pinter, A., Hock, A., Vastyan, A.M. et al. Posterior sagittal approach with perirectal dissection for reconstructive surgery of severe urogenital anomalies. Pediatr Surg Int 23, 57–60 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-006-1809-2
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-006-1809-2