Transanal Versus Laparoscopic-assisted Transanal Through in the Management of Hirschsprung's Disease
- Conditions
- Pediatric DisorderHirschprung's Disease
- Registration Number
- NCT06419998
- Lead Sponsor
- Egyptian Biomedical Research Network
- Brief Summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the surgical and functional outcomes of pure transanal endorectal pull-through (TAERPT) and laparoscopic-assistance endorectal pull-through (LAERPT) in pediatric patients presented with Hirschsprung's Disease between 3 months and 18 years old.
The main questions our study aims to answer are:
* Does post-operative continence differs between the two groups?
* Does post-operative constipation differs between the two groups?
* Does post-operative soiling differs between the two groups
* Does post-operative enterocolitis differs between the two groups?
* Do post-operative complications differ between the two groups? If there is a comparison group: Researchers will compare between pure transanal endorectal pull-through (TAERPT) and laparoscopic-assistance endorectal pull-through (LAERPT) to see if there is a difference in post-operative continence, constipation, soiling, enterocolitis or complications.
Participants will be divided into two groups; 40 patients will be treated by TAERPT and included in Group A and 30 patients will be treated by LAERPT and included in Group B.
- Detailed Description
Introduction: One-stage treatment of endorectal pull-through for Hirschsprung's disease could be approached through a complete transanal approach or with the assistance of laparoscopy. Our study aims to compare the surgical and functional outcomes of pure transanal endorectal pull-through (TAERPT) and laparoscopic-assistance endorectal pull-through (LAERPT). Material \& methods: This retrospective study included 70 pediatric patients presented with Hirschsprung's Disease to Elshatby University Hospital. 40 patients were treated by TAERPT and included in Group A and 30 patients were treated by LAERPT and included in Group B. The two groups were compared as regards the operative data as well as the post-operative outcomes including the time of passage of stools, time of tolerating oral feeding, the duration of hospital stay, and the development of any early postoperative complications. Also, the number of bowel habits, constipation, enterocolitis, abdominal distension, anastomotic stricture, and continence were assessed.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 70
Not provided
- Patients with previous colostomy.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Post-operative enterocolitis One post-operative year The two groups will be compared according to post-operative enterocolitis whether present or not
Post-operative complications One post-operative year The two groups will be compared according to post-operative complications whether present or not
Post-operative continence One post-operative year The two groups will be compared according to post-operative continence whether continent or incontinent by using Abbreviated Baylor Social Continence Scale. the sore ranges from 0 to 24 with the minimum score revealing an excellent result and the highest score revealing the worst result. (Excellent = 0-5, Good = 7-12, Fair = 13-18, Poor = 19-24)
Post-operative constipation One post-operative year The two groups will be compared according to post-operative constipation whether present or not
Post-operative soiling One post-operative year The two groups will be compared according to post-operative soiling whether present or not
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Ahmed El Rouby
🇪🇬Alexandria, Egypt