Tethered cord in patients affected by anorectal malformations : a survey from the ARM-Net Consortium
(2017) In Pediatric Surgery International 33(8). p.849-854- Abstract
Purpose: The goal of this study was to determine the degree of consensus in the management of spinal cord tethering (TC) in patients with anorectal malformation (ARM) in a large cohort of European pediatric centers. Methods: A survey was sent to pediatric surgeons (one per center) members of the ARM-Net Consortium. Results: Twenty-four (86%) from ten different countries completed the survey. Overall prevalence of TC was: 21% unknown, 46% below 15, and 29% between 15 and 30%. Ninety-six agreed on screening all patients for TC regardless the type of ARM and 79% start screening at birth. Responses varied in TC definition and diagnostic tools. Fifty percent of respondents prefer ultrasound (US), 21% indicate either US or magnetic resonance... (More)
Purpose: The goal of this study was to determine the degree of consensus in the management of spinal cord tethering (TC) in patients with anorectal malformation (ARM) in a large cohort of European pediatric centers. Methods: A survey was sent to pediatric surgeons (one per center) members of the ARM-Net Consortium. Results: Twenty-four (86%) from ten different countries completed the survey. Overall prevalence of TC was: 21% unknown, 46% below 15, and 29% between 15 and 30%. Ninety-six agreed on screening all patients for TC regardless the type of ARM and 79% start screening at birth. Responses varied in TC definition and diagnostic tools. Fifty percent of respondents prefer ultrasound (US), 21% indicate either US or magnetic resonance (MRI) based on a pre-defined risk of presenting TC, and 21% perform both. Discrepancy exists in complementary test: 82% carry out urodynamic studies (UDS) and only 37% perform somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP). Prophylactic untethering is performed in only two centers (8%). Conclusions: Survey results support TC screening in all patients with ARM and conservative management of TC. There is discrepancy in the definition of TC, screening tools, and complementary test. Protocols should be developed to avoid such variability in management.
(Less)
- author
- contributor
- Stenström, Pernilla LU
- author collaboration
- organization
- publishing date
- 2017
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Anorectal malformation, Arm-Net Consortium, Neurosurgery, Tethered cord
- in
- Pediatric Surgery International
- volume
- 33
- issue
- 8
- pages
- 849 - 854
- publisher
- Springer
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85021844420
- pmid:28674920
- ISSN
- 0179-0358
- DOI
- 10.1007/s00383-017-4105-4
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- additional info
- Publisher Copyright: © 2017, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
- id
- 9ddcacbe-4c56-4bd5-bdc0-087d82a42a77
- date added to LUP
- 2021-06-28 17:17:11
- date last changed
- 2024-09-21 22:34:30
@article{9ddcacbe-4c56-4bd5-bdc0-087d82a42a77, abstract = {{<p>Purpose: The goal of this study was to determine the degree of consensus in the management of spinal cord tethering (TC) in patients with anorectal malformation (ARM) in a large cohort of European pediatric centers. Methods: A survey was sent to pediatric surgeons (one per center) members of the ARM-Net Consortium. Results: Twenty-four (86%) from ten different countries completed the survey. Overall prevalence of TC was: 21% unknown, 46% below 15, and 29% between 15 and 30%. Ninety-six agreed on screening all patients for TC regardless the type of ARM and 79% start screening at birth. Responses varied in TC definition and diagnostic tools. Fifty percent of respondents prefer ultrasound (US), 21% indicate either US or magnetic resonance (MRI) based on a pre-defined risk of presenting TC, and 21% perform both. Discrepancy exists in complementary test: 82% carry out urodynamic studies (UDS) and only 37% perform somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP). Prophylactic untethering is performed in only two centers (8%). Conclusions: Survey results support TC screening in all patients with ARM and conservative management of TC. There is discrepancy in the definition of TC, screening tools, and complementary test. Protocols should be developed to avoid such variability in management.</p>}}, author = {{Fanjul, María and Samuk, I. and Bagolan, P. and Leva, E. and Sloots, C. and Giné, C. and Aminoff, D. and Midrio, P. and De Blaauw, Ivo and Deluggi, Stefan and Fascetti Leon, Francesco and García, Araceli and Giuliani, Stefano and Grano, Caterina and Grasshoff-Derr, Sabine and Haanen, Michel and Holland-Cunz, Stephan and Jenetzky, Ekkehart and Lacher, Martin and Lisi, Grabiele and Makedonsky, Igor and Marcelis, Carlos and Miserez, Marc and Ozen, Onur and Percin, Ferda and Reutter, Heiko and Rohleder, Stephan and Schmiedeke, Eberhard and Schwarzer, Nicole and Sloots, Pim and Till, Holger and Van der Steeg, Lideke and Van Rooij, Iris and Volk, Patrick and Wester, Tomas and Zwink, Nadine}}, issn = {{0179-0358}}, keywords = {{Anorectal malformation; Arm-Net Consortium; Neurosurgery; Tethered cord}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{8}}, pages = {{849--854}}, publisher = {{Springer}}, series = {{Pediatric Surgery International}}, title = {{Tethered cord in patients affected by anorectal malformations : a survey from the ARM-Net Consortium}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00383-017-4105-4}}, doi = {{10.1007/s00383-017-4105-4}}, volume = {{33}}, year = {{2017}}, }