Perforation of the esophagus during dilatation is a rare complication that might cause mortality. We present the report of a 3-year-old girl who was diagnosed with B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia at 17 months of age. She experienced a complicated clinical course after chemotherapy was initiated, which included mucositis and acute pericarditis. She later developed an acquired esophageal stricture and tracheoesophageal fistula, which were managed with resection and primary anastomosis when she was in remission. Postoperatively, the patient developed a leak, which was treated conservatively. She subsequently developed a stricture that was treated successfully. On the fourth dilatation attempt and after she was sent home, she presented with persistent vomiting and low-grade fever and became vitally unstable on the same day, after stabilization, upper gastroenterology contrast revealed contrast filling the pericardium. She was managed conservatively with close observation and serial echocardiograms and then discharged home on day 18 in good condition after complete resolution of the pericardial effusion.

Background Port-a-catheter insertion and removal are common procedures performed for children with chronic disease or cancer. Although its removal is usually straightforward, some difficulties during the procedure can be encountered. Several methods have been described in the literature to handle those cases where lines have become stuck. Aim To describe our simple technique in dealing with stuck port-a-catheters during removal. We will additionally report the incidence and factors associated with this complication. Methods A retrospective chart review study was performed between January 2009 and December 2019. Of a collective 2040 ports that were removed during the research interval, cases of difficult port removal were collected and reviewed. In 42 cases, catheter removal difficulty is encountered, and a second incision at the venous access site is performed. Failure of this procedure in removing the stuck catheter is then followed by catheter stenting and removal over a guide wire. Results Difficult removal of port-a-catheters was experienced in 42 cases (2%). The mean age at removal for those cases was 6.6 years. Most of the port-a-cath removals were done after treatment completion (74%). Ports had been left in situ for a mean duration of 44 months. The stepladder technique with wire stenting of the catheter was successful in 37 cases (88%), while the rest were only partially removed (distal part). The retained part was extracted using an angiographic technique. No short- or long-term complications were encountered in any of those 42 patients. Conclusions Stepladder with wire stenting of catheters approach deals with difficult line removals. Our technique is, therefore, simple, feasible, and effective. Level of evidence IV.

No abstract

Background/purpose Surgical management of high-type anorectal malformations (ARM) has evolved over the years with the widespread of the laparoscopic approach over the last two decades. This study aims to compare the outcome of patients with high anorectal malformation (ARM) managed with laparoscopic-assisted anorectal pull-through (LAARP) vs. the open posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP) at a single Institution. Methods A retrospective chart review of pediatric patients, who were managed for high-type ARM at our institution, was performed for the period 2000–2015. Nine were excluded because of a lack of important data. Demographic data, surgical approach, associated anomalies, and complications were collected. Functional outcome was measured using the modified clinical scoring for the defecation function of the Japanese study group of anorectal anomalies. Comparison between groups was done using the T test for continuous variables and the Fisher-exact test for proportions. P < 0.05 is considered statistically significant. Results There were 82 patients with high type imperforate anus (59 males and 23 females) 73% had laparoscopy vs. 27% open. Type of fistulae were rectourethral (36), rectovesical (12), no fistula (19), and (15) cloaca anomalies. Patients underwent surgery at a mean age 8.4 (laparoscopy) vs. 10.1 (open) months (P value = 0.14). There was no difference between the two groups regarding weight at the surgery or associated anomalies, except for VACTRAL and genitourinary malformations which were more among the laparoscopic group (8 vs. 1). There was no statistical significance for all elements of defecation function score: sensation, constipation, and soiling (P values 0.17, 0.6, 0.07, respectively). There was no difference between the two groups regarding rectal prolapse (P = 0.06), whereas rectal stenosis is more in PSARP compared to LAARP (P = 0.03). The hospital stay was significantly shorter in LAARP 7.1 vs. 9.4 (P = 0.006). Conclusions The defecation function and complication rate for both laparoscopic and open groups were almost similar. This may justify the preference of the laparoscopic approach over the open one, given its minimally invasive nature.