Laparoscopic-Assisted Anorectal Pull-Through for Currarino Syndrome

Treatment Strategy for Currarino Syndrome Complicated With Anorectal Stenosis

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to review the treatment experience and outcomes of Currarino syndrome (CS) complicated with anorectal stenosis to evaluate the current treatment strategies.

METHODS

Seven cases of CS complicated with anorectal stenosis, treated at our hospital between 1998 and 2021, were retrospectively investigated. This is a case series article from a single institution.

RESULTS

In six and three cases and one case, the presacral mass was a mature teratoma, meningocele, and lipoma, respectively. Resection of the lesion was performed in all six cases of mature teratoma, and duraplasty was performed before resection in all three cases of meningocele. Moreover, surgery for anorectal stenosis was performed simultaneously in four patients. Surgery was performed for six cases of anorectal stenosis, with the remaining case relieved by dilation using a metal bougie. The surgical methods used were a partial resection with end-to-end anastomosis, anorectal strictureplasty, pull-through, posterior sagittal anorectoplasty, and cutback after mass resection. Pathological analysis of the anorectal stenoses revealed disorganized and rough smooth muscle fibers and the replacement of the stroma by an increased quantity of collagen fibers.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical outcomes of CS can be improved by establishing a treatment flow chart and understanding the complicated pathophysiology of the disease.

Selection of operative approach in children with Currarino syndrome

PURPOSE

To summarize the experience of surgical treatment of children diagnosed with Currarino syndrome, with an emphasis on the selection of an optimal operative approach.

METHODS

The clinical materials of patients diagnosed with Currarino syndrome were recorded. Special attention was given to the operative management, particularly the different routes for operation. The type of ARM was the critical point. The Rintala score was used for the evaluation of bowel function.

RESULTS

The medical records of 26 patients were reviewed. Seven were male, and 19 were female, with a mean age of 19.38 ± 13.80 months. The standard posterior sagittal approach (SPS) group included three perineal fistulae, one anal stenosis, one retraction of the rectum after anoplasty for vestibular fistula, one ARM with no fistula, one rectourethral fistula, and one cloaca. In the limited posterior sagittal approach (LPS) group, there were 13 perineal fistulae, one displacement of the rectum, and one retraction of the rectum after anoplasty for the vestibular fistula. In addition, the transanal approach (TA) and anterior sagittal approach (AS) were also used. The mean follow-up time was 39.48 ± 26.84 m. The Rintala score was 16.74 ± 2.93.

CONCLUSION

For a perineal fistula, SPS or LPS should be used to reach anoplasty and remove the presacral mass. For a vestibular fistula, the AS or LPS should be chosen. For anal stenosis, SPS or LPS should be used.