We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Outcome of loop versus divided colostomy in the management of anorectal malformations.
Annals of Saudi Medicine 2016 September
BACKGROUND: Colostomy is a common part of the management of high anorectal malformation (ARM) in the pediatric population.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the type of colostomy (loop vs divided) has an impact on outcome in patients with ARM.
DESIGN: A retrospective study.
SETTING: King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, a tertiary care center.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who were managed with colostomy for ARM and had definitive repair during the period of January 2000 to December 2014. Outcomes relative to the type of the colostomy were compared.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Morbidities associated with each type of colostomy.
RESULTS: There were 104 patients managed for ARM with colostomy as staged procedures, 63 males and 41 females. Patients had a colostomy at a median age of 6 days and were closed at a median of 11 months. Definitive repair was at a median age of 17 months. Type of fistula was 8 perineal, 21 rectovestibular, 35 rectourethral, 11 rectovesical and there were 16 without fistula and 13 cloaca anomalies. There were 55 loop and 49 divided colostomies. There were 91 descending/sigmoid and 13 transverse colostomies. Operative time for loop colostomy closure was shorter than with divided colo6stomy (76 minutes vs 94 minutes, P=.002). Three patients among the divided group had reversed orientation of the colostomy that had affected bowel preparations negatively prior to its repair. There was no differences in complications of creation and closure of loop and divided colostomies except in occurrence of skin excoriation. There was more skin excoriation with divided colostomy compared to loop colostomy (17 vs 10, P=.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Loop colostomy has a shorter closure operative time and relatively fewer complications compared to the divided colostomy. Our data suggests that loop colostomy may be more favorable than divided colostomy for ARM patients.
LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature of the study and some colostomies performed at other hospitals.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the type of colostomy (loop vs divided) has an impact on outcome in patients with ARM.
DESIGN: A retrospective study.
SETTING: King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, a tertiary care center.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who were managed with colostomy for ARM and had definitive repair during the period of January 2000 to December 2014. Outcomes relative to the type of the colostomy were compared.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Morbidities associated with each type of colostomy.
RESULTS: There were 104 patients managed for ARM with colostomy as staged procedures, 63 males and 41 females. Patients had a colostomy at a median age of 6 days and were closed at a median of 11 months. Definitive repair was at a median age of 17 months. Type of fistula was 8 perineal, 21 rectovestibular, 35 rectourethral, 11 rectovesical and there were 16 without fistula and 13 cloaca anomalies. There were 55 loop and 49 divided colostomies. There were 91 descending/sigmoid and 13 transverse colostomies. Operative time for loop colostomy closure was shorter than with divided colo6stomy (76 minutes vs 94 minutes, P=.002). Three patients among the divided group had reversed orientation of the colostomy that had affected bowel preparations negatively prior to its repair. There was no differences in complications of creation and closure of loop and divided colostomies except in occurrence of skin excoriation. There was more skin excoriation with divided colostomy compared to loop colostomy (17 vs 10, P=.04).
CONCLUSIONS: Loop colostomy has a shorter closure operative time and relatively fewer complications compared to the divided colostomy. Our data suggests that loop colostomy may be more favorable than divided colostomy for ARM patients.
LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature of the study and some colostomies performed at other hospitals.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app