Journal of the Formosan Medical Association = Taiwan yi zhi · 2020
Risk factors and management for anastomotic stricture after surgical reconstruction of esophageal atresia.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chiang Che-Ming, Hsu Wen-Ming, Chang Mei-Hwei, Hsu Hong-Yuan, Ni Yen-Hsuan, Chen Huey-Ling, Wu Jia-Feng
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Anastomotic stricture (AS) is a major morbidity of patients with esophageal atresia (EA) after surgical reconstruction. Our study determined the risk factors of AS after EA reconstruction. The therapeutic efficacy and complications of esophageal dilatation for children with AS were also evaluated.
METHODS: Forty children treated for EA between January 2008 and December 2018 were included in this retrospective analysis. Esophageal dilatation was performed when AS was diagnosed. The therapeutic effect of esophageal dilatation was determined based on nutritional status, as assessed by the weight-for-age z-score.
RESULTS: Sixteen EA patients developed AS. A gap >1.5 cm between the esophageal pouches (P = 0.02) in patients with EA and type A EA was a risk factor for developing AS. A mean of 7.7 sessions of esophageal dilatation were performed per patient, and no complications occurred. The nutritional status of EA children with AS after dilatation was not inferior to that of the children without AS at the 6-month follow-up.
CONCLUSION: A gap >1.5 cm between the esophageal pouches and type A EA are risk factors for AS after esophageal reconstruction. Esophageal dilatation is both safe and effective for managing strictures and improves nutritional status in EA children with AS.
METHODS: Forty children treated for EA between January 2008 and December 2018 were included in this retrospective analysis. Esophageal dilatation was performed when AS was diagnosed. The therapeutic effect of esophageal dilatation was determined based on nutritional status, as assessed by the weight-for-age z-score.
RESULTS: Sixteen EA patients developed AS. A gap >1.5 cm between the esophageal pouches (P = 0.02) in patients with EA and type A EA was a risk factor for developing AS. A mean of 7.7 sessions of esophageal dilatation were performed per patient, and no complications occurred. The nutritional status of EA children with AS after dilatation was not inferior to that of the children without AS at the 6-month follow-up.
CONCLUSION: A gap >1.5 cm between the esophageal pouches and type A EA are risk factors for AS after esophageal reconstruction. Esophageal dilatation is both safe and effective for managing strictures and improves nutritional status in EA children with AS.