Multicenter Study of 342 Anorectal Malformation Patients: Age, Gender, Krickenbeck Subtypes, and Associated Anomalies.

INTRODUCTION: Published studies based on Krickenbeck classification of anorectal malformations (ARMs) are still insufficient to assess the global as well as regional relative incidence of different ARM subtypes, gender distribution, and associated anomalies. The primary purpose of this study was to provide an estimate of those in Global Initiative for Children's Surgery (GICS) research group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected ARM data prospectively for 1 year from four institutes of different geographic locations. A total of 342 patients were included in this study (195, 126, 11, and 10 from Bangladesh, Iran, Papua New Guinea, and Oxford, United Kingdom, respectively). RESULTS: Overall male to female ratio was 1:1. The most frequent ARM subtype was perineal fistula (23.7% = 81/342). About 48.5% (166/342) patients had at least one associated anomaly. Cardiac and genitourinary systems were the most commonly affected systems, 31.6% (108/342) and 18.4% (63/342), respectively. These organ-systems were followed by anomalies of vertebral/spinal (9.9% = 34/342), musculoskeletal (4.4% = 15/342), and gastrointestinal/abdominal (3.2% = 11/342) systems. Rectovesical fistula had the highest percentage (96.4% = 27/28) of associated anomalies. About 18.1% (62/342) patients had multiple anomalies. ARMs (both isolated and with associated anomalies) occurred equally in males and females. Comparison between patients from Bangladesh and Iran showed differences in relative incidence in ARM subtypes. In addition, Iranian patient group had higher percentage of associated anomalies compared with Bangladeshi (73 vs. 35.4%). CONCLUSION: Our study provides important insights about ARM subtypes, gender distribution and associated anomalies based on Krickenbeck classification especially from Bangladesh and Iran.

Repair of cleft lip and simultaneous repair of cleft hard palate with vomer flap in unilateral complete cleft lip and palate: a comparative study.

UNLABELLED: Repair of anterior palate after repairing the cleft lip in complete cleft lip and palate patient is sometimes very difficult. It needs wide, extensive and difficult dissection, and has later chances of wound infection, wound dehiscence, complete wound disruption, recurrent oronasal fistula formation and also maxillary hypoplasia. In this study, we compare the outcome of simultaneous repair of cleft lip and cleft hard palate with vomer flap against cleft lip repair alone in patients with unilateral complete cleft lip and palate (UCLP). METHODS: A prospective study was carried out in 43 patients with UCLP. In Group A, 23 patients underwent cleft lip and cleft hard palate repair with vomer flaps simultaneously, and only cleft lip repair was done in another 20 patients in Group B at the first sitting. After 3 months in both groups, repair of the cleft soft palate and cleft entire palate was done. The gaps of the cleft alveolus and posterior border of the cleft hard palate were measured during the first and second operation, and duration of operations, postoperative complications and requirement of blood transfusion during the operation were also recorded. RESULTS: The procedure of simultaneous repair of cleft lip and closure of cleft hard palate with a vomer flap is easy to perform. Cleft alveolar and gap of the posterior border of the cleft hard palate were reduced remarkably. No fistula formation occurred and no blood transfusion was needed, but the procedure took some extra operating time. These were compared with simple cleft lip repair. CONCLUSION: Repairs of cleft lip and simultaneous closure of cleft hard palate with vomer flaps are safe in patients with UCLP, and it makes easy the closure of the soft palate later on and decreases the chance of oronasal fistula.