RESUMO
PURPOSE: Antegrade colonic enemas (ACE) can be an effective management option for defecation disorders and improve quality of life. Best practice regarding channel placement is unclear and variation may exist around preferred initial type of channel, age at placement, and underlying diagnoses. We aimed to describe practice patterns and patient characteristics around ACE channel placement. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of children with an ACE channel cared for at sites participating in the Pediatric Colorectal and Pelvic Learning Consortium (PCPLC) from 2017 to 2022. Kruskal-Wallis test was utilized to test the age at surgery by site with significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: 500 patients with ACE channel were included. 293 (58.6%) patients had their ACE procedure at a PCPLC center. The median age at surgery was 7.6 [IQR 5.3-11.0] years for the overall cohort and 8.1 [IQR 5.3-11.5] years for placement at PCPLC centers. For PCPLC centers, median age at placement varied significantly across centers (p = 0.009). 371 (74.2%) patients received Malone appendicostomy, 116 (23.2%) received cecostomy, and 13 (2.6%) received Neo-Malone appendicostomy. Median age of patients by channel type was 7.7 [IQR 5.3-11.0], 7.5 [IQR 5.7-11.0], and 9.8 [IQR 4.2-11.6] years, respectively. The most common indication for cecostomy was idiopathic/refractory constipation (52.6%), whereas anorectal malformation was the most common indication for Malone (47.2%) and Neo-Malone (61.5%). Among ACE channels placed at PCPLC centers, there was variation across institutions in preferred initial channel type. The 4 highest volume centers favored Malone appendicostomy over cecostomy. CONCLUSION: There is variation in practice of ACE channel placement. At specialty pediatric colorectal centers, age at time of placement and type of channel placed varied across institutions. Further work is needed to better characterize diagnosis- and age-focused patient centered outcomes to clarify recommendations for our patients who benefit from these procedures. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective comparative study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
RESUMO
Pediatric surgeons, anesthesia providers, and nurses from North America and other high-income countries are increasingly engaged in resource-limited areas, with short-term missions as the most common form of involvement. However, consensus recommendations currently do not exist for short-term missions in pediatric general surgery and associated perioperative care. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Delivery of Surgical Care Subcommittee and American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) Global Pediatric Surgery Committee, with the American Pediatric Surgical Nurses Association, Inc. (APSNA) Global Health Special Interest Group, and the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA) Committee on International Education and Service generated consensus recommendations for short-term missions based on extensive experience with short-term missions. Three distinct, but related areas were identified: (i) Broad goals of surgical partnerships between high-income countries and low- and middle-income countries. A previous set of guidelines published by the Global Paediatric Surgery Network Collaborative (GPSN) was endorsed by all groups; (ii) Guidelines for the conduct of short-term missions were developed, including planning, in-country perioperative patient care, post-trip follow-up, and sustainability; and (iii) travel and safety considerations critical to short-term mission success were enumerated. A diverse group of stakeholders developed these guidelines for short-term missions in low- and middle-income countries. These guidelines may be a useful tool to ensure safe, responsible, and ethical short-term missions given increasing engagement of high-income country providers in this work.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Pediatric surgeons, anesthesia providers, and nurses from North America and other high-income countries (HICs) are increasingly engaged in resource-limited areas, with short-term missions (STMs) as the most common form of involvement. However, consensus recommendations currently do not exist for STMs in pediatric general surgery and associated perioperative care. METHODS: The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Delivery of Surgical Care Subcommittee and American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) Global Pediatric Surgery Committee, with the American Pediatric Surgical Nurses Association, Inc. (APSNA) Global Health Special Interest Group, and the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA) Committee on International Education and Service generated consensus recommendations for STMs based on extensive experience with STMs. RESULTS: Three distinct, but related areas were identified: 1) Broad goals of surgical partnerships between HICs- and low and middle-income countries (LMICs). A previous set of guidelines published by the Global Paediatric Surgery Network Collaborative (GPSN), was endorsed by all groups; 2) Guidelines for the conduct of STMs were developed, including planning, in-country perioperative patient care, post-trip follow-up, and sustainability; 3) travel and safety considerations critical to STM success were enumerated. CONCLUSION: A diverse group of stakeholders developed these guidelines for STMs in LMICs. These guidelines may be a useful tool to ensure safe, responsible, and ethical STMs given increasing engagement of HIC providers in this work. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.
