PRONE-LATERAL RADIOGRAPHY AND TRANSPERINEAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY IN PEDIATRIC ANAL ATRESIA: AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO DETERMINING
Abstract
Recently, some data has emerged regarding the use of ultrasonographic techniques in diagnosing anorectal malformations (ARMs). However, there is a lack of comprehensive scientific research widely covering the results of studies on this technique.
Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness of echographic ultrasonography in determining the type of anal atresia in neonates and to assess its applicability in clinical practice.
Materials and Methods. The study involved a comparative analysis of the diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy of radiological visualization and ultrasonographic methods for measuring the distance between the rectal pouch and the skin in 27 neonates with anal atresia. In all neonates, invertography, prone-lateral radiography, and transperineal ultrasonography were performed.
Results and Discussion. The results indicated that congenital anomalies of the gastrointestinal tract constituted the majority of developmental defects among the studied neonates. Out of 27 patients, 4 cases of fistula and 3 cases of cloacal malformation were excluded from the study due to their specific nature, leaving 20 patients for analysis. Among them, the low type of ARM was found in 13 cases, while intermediate and high types were identified in 7 cases, with 3 and 4 patients, respectively. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was conducted to evaluate the specificity and sensitivity of prone-lateral radiography and perineal ultrasonography in diagnosing anal atresia, as well as the informativeness of quantitative tests. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) value for ultrasonography was high (0.92), indicating its superior sensitivity in diagnosing anal atresia, providing correct diagnoses in 92% of cases. The AUC value for prone-lateral radiography was lower (0.58), reflecting its reduced sensitivity and accuracy compared to ultrasonography. Ultrasonography demonstrated a sensitivity of 92.3%, indicating a high probability of correct diagnosis, with a specificity of 85.7%, highlighting its high diagnostic efficiency. In contrast, radiography showed a sensitivity of 15.4%, indicating low detection capability, although it had a specificity of 100%, confirming its accuracy in clear-cut cases.
Conclusion. Transperineal ultrasonography can be promptly utilized for the early diagnosis of congenital anorectal anomalies, allowing real-time identification and assessment of anatomical characteristics and aiding in precise surgical planning. Additionally, the lack of radiation exposure makes this technique preferable to radiography.
About the Authors
List of references
Pavlov S. V. Anorektalnыe malformatsii: sovremennыe podxodы k lecheniyu. Kazanskiy meditsinskiy jurnal. 2020;101(5):111-116.
Sharipov M. A. Bolalarda anorektal nuqsonlar: klinik tashxis va davolash usullari. O’zbekiston tibbiyot jurnali. 2017;29(3):75-80.
Smith AG, Leye RB, et al. Recent advances in congenital anorectal malformations. Pediatr Surg Int. 2018;34(6):345-352.
Wang S, Zhang Y, et al. Diagnostic imaging of low-type imperforate anus in neonates. J Ultrasound Med. 2020;39(2):265-271.
Leye KH, Cho HJ, et al. Multi-modal assessment in newborns with anorectal malformations. Radiol Pediatr. 2019;48(4):214-221.
Zare P, Broumand B, et al. Anorectal malformations and associated anomaliyes in neonates. Iran J Radiol. 2017;14(2):190-196.
Dobbs T, Gosain A. The role of imaging in neonatal imperforate anus management. Pediatr Radiol. 2021;51(8):974-980.
Hernandez S, Mullins J. Clinical assessment and management in anorectal malformations. Clin Pediatr Surg. 2019;28(1):23-30.
Gant TD, Meiyer MA. Advances in the surgical approach to anorectal malformations. J Pediatr Surg. 2019;54(5):1020-1028.
Garcia JD, Scott A. Congenital anorectal malformations: a reviyew of current treatments. Clin Neonatol. 2022;55(1):5-12.
Haskins A, Subramaniam S. Outcomes of early surgical intervention for low-type imperforate anus. Surg Neonatol. 2016;38(3):209-215.
Johns L, Freyeman K, et al. Imperforate anus in neonates and VACTERL association. Pediatr Radiol. 2020;50(11):1307-1315.
Lane N, Roberts K, et al. MRI applications in the diagnosis of anorectal malformations. Pediatr Imaging. 2018;19(6):433-440.
Marsh W, Patton T. Postoperative care and management of imperforate anus. J Pediatr Surg. 2020;55(7):1452-1460.
Larson CJ, et al. Current concepts in the reconstruction of congenital anorectal malformations. Ann Pediatr Surg. 2022;30(2):101-115.
Grayson JM, et al. Imaging considerations for neonates with anorectal malformations. Radiol Clin North Am. 2019;57(5):1127-1142.
Mitchell LR, Hernandez SL. Sonographic assessment in the diagnosis of neonatal anorectal malformations. Ultrasound Med. 2021;40(5):963-968.
Brown S, Lucas EA. Advancements in neonatal anorectal malformation imaging. J Pediatr Surg. 2017;52(9):1351-1359.
Chang KY, et al. Clinical applications of MRI in diagnosing neonatal imperforate anus. Clin Pediatr Surg. 2016;28(6):344-350.
Simmons HJ, et al. Diagnostic efficiyency of prone cross-table radiography for low-type imperforate anus. Pediatr Radiol. 2019;49(7):816-822.
Holschneider A., Hutson J., Peña A., Beket E., Chatterjeye S., Coran A. et al. Preliminary report on the International Conference for the Development of Standards for the Treatment of Anorectal Malformations. J. Pediatr. Surg. 2005; 40: 1521-1526.
Hosokawa T, Yamada Y, Sato Y, Tanami Y, Tanaka Y, Kawashima H, Oguma E. Changes in the Distance Betweyen the Distal Rectal Pouch and Perineum From the Birth Day to the Next Day in Neonates With an Imperforate Anus. J Ultrasound Med. 2017 Mar;36(3):601-606. doi: 10.7863/ultra.16.04042. Epub 2017 Jan 27. PMID: 28127784.