Surgical management and outcomes of total colonic aganglionosis in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Journal of Pediatric Surgery, cilt.61, sa.10, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Derleme
- Cilt numarası: 61 Sayı: 10
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2026.163319
- Dergi Adı: Journal of Pediatric Surgery
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Duhamel procedure, Hirschsprung disease, Ileoanal pull-through, Meta-analysis, Pull-through procedure, Total colonic aganglionosis
- Hacettepe Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Aim: Total colonic aganglionosis (TCA) is a rare form of Hirschsprung disease, and there is no consensus regarding its optimal surgical management. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate different surgical approaches and outcomes in children with TCA. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase was performed for studies published between January 2000 and December 2025. The review followed PRISMA guidelines and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251078401). Eligible studies included patients aged ≤18 years with TCA who underwent conventional pull-through procedures (CPT; Duhamel, Soave, Swenson, Rehbein, and Ikeda–Soper) or non-conventional techniques (NCPT; STATE procedure, J-pouch, right- or left-sided colonic patch pull-through, and ileocecal patch). A subgroup analysis comparing Duhamel and ileoanal pull-through procedures (IAPT) was also performed. Outcomes included fecal incontinence, Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis (HAEC), requirement for additional interventions, postoperative intestinal obstruction, and mortality. Meta-analysis was performed using jamovi software, version 2.3.28, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Results: Seven studies including 134 patients compared CPT (n = 85) with NCPT (n = 49), and ten studies including 274 patients compared Duhamel (n = 143) with IAPT (n = 131). Across both comparisons, pooled odds ratios (ORs) showed no statistically significant differences in fecal incontinence, HAEC, requirement for additional interventions, postoperative intestinal obstruction (Duhamel vs IAPT only), or mortality. For CPT versus NCPT, the pooled ORs were 1.1 for fecal incontinence (95% CI, 0.44–2.73; p = 0.837), 1.1 for HAEC (95% CI, 0.49–2.71; p = 0.743), 4.3 for requirement for additional interventions (95% CI, 0.86–22.1; p = 0.074), and 3.4 for mortality (95% CI, 0.52–21.5; p = 0.198). For Duhamel versus IAPT, the pooled ORs were 1.4 for fecal incontinence (95% CI, 0.60–3.36; p = 0.423), 0.6 for HAEC (95% CI, 0.22–2.06; p = 0.503), 1.8 for requirement for additional interventions (95% CI, 0.62–5.50; p = 0.262), 1.1 for postoperative intestinal obstruction (95% CI, 0.21–6.01; p = 0.875), and 1.03 for mortality (95% CI, 0.25–4.20; p = 0.965). Conclusion: No statistically significant differences were identified between CPT and NCPT or between Duhamel and IAPT for the evaluated outcomes in children with TCA. However, the absence of statistically significant differences should not be interpreted as evidence of equivalence, particularly given the small sample sizes, wide confidence intervals, and clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the studies included. The choice of surgical approach should be individualized according to disease extent, patient-specific factors, institutional experience, and surgical expertise. Type of study: Meta-analysis. Level of evidence: III.