Background: Duplications of the alimentary tract are known for their embryonic, anatomical, clinical, and pathologic variations. Summarizing the features of these lesions would reveal these characteristics and guide appropriate management. The objectives of this study are to describe the clinical features and characteristics of all cases of duplication of alimentary tract managed at a tertiary center. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study on all cases of duplications of the alimentary tract managed at a tertiary center from July 2015 to June 2020 (5 years) was conducted after approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee. Data regarding history, demographic details, symptoms, clinical features and investigation results, and intraoperative and histopathologic findings were collected from the hospital records and analyzed. Results: Twenty-eight cases of duplication were managed during this period. They had different locations (esophageal-5 [cervical-2 and thoracic-3], gastric-1, jejunal-3, ileal – 11, cecal-3, appendicular-2, colorectal-1, rectal-1, and posterior anal canal-1) and site-specific symptoms but definite histopathology with evidence of adjacent gastrointestinal tissue on microscopic examination. Unique cases included cervical esophageal duplication, bleeding ileal duplication (ID) with heterotopic mucosa, ID with bezoar, jejunal duplication with malrotation, appendicular duplication with type 2 pouch colon and anorectal malformation, rectal duplication, and posterior anal duplication. Case-specific management ensured minimal complication without any mortality. Conclusion: Variable location and site-specific symptoms necessitate individualized case-specific management of duplication anomalies. Histopathology confirms both native and heterotopic gastrointestinal tissues and is indispensable for the diagnosis.

No abstract

Background To compare the urinary biomarkers—beta 2-microglobulin (β2M), monocyte chemotactic peptide-1 (MCP-1), and transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β1)—in the outcome assessment of children with pelviureteric junction obstruction (PUJO) undergoing pyeloplasty. Methods A prospective study was conducted on children with PUJO who had pyeloplasty in a tertiary care center from July 2016 to March 2018. Urine samples were obtained from freshly voided urine samples before surgery and after 6 months of pyeloplasty. Ratio between the levels of biomarkers and urinary creatinine before and after surgery were compared. Results A total of 72 patients had pyeloplasty during this period. The mean levels of standardized urinary β2M, MCP-1 and TGF-β1 before surgery were 3.94 ± 4.06, 96.63 ± 117.68 and 310.65 ± 423.87, respectively, which was significantly higher than the corresponding values in the postoperative period, obtained after 6 months of surgery; postoperative mean values were 3.12 ± 3.95, 25.28 ± 32.06, 109.95 ± 118.72 (P < 0.001), respectively. Using Wilcoxon signed-rank test, fall of MCP-1 and TGF-β1 was more significant compared to β2M. Conclusion Urinary biomarkers (β2M, MCP-1 and TGF-β) offer an effective way of outcome assessment of pyeloplasty for PUJO in children, especially MCP-1 and TGF-β1.

Background: Any criteria (clinical, pathologic, microbiological or histo-pathologic) attributing a case of Paediatric gastrointestinal perforation to Typhoid would be of help in reaching a proper diagnosis to guide appropriate management. Aims and Objectives: To review all cases of Typhoid perforation for their clinical, pathologic and intra-operative findings. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on all cases of typhoid perforation (gastrointestinal perforation with positive Widal test) operated at a tertiary care centre from September 2015 to September 2018. Data regarding their clinical findings, investigation results, intraoperative findings, nature of the surgical intervention, postoperative results and histopathological findings were collected from their records and analysed. Results: A total of 13 patients were operated during this period with positive Widal’s test at presentation. 6/13 had single ileal perforation; two patients had multiple ileal perforations; perforation at atypical sites were found in four patients (one each at gastric, duodenal, caecal and rectal); one patient presented with Meckel’s band obstruction with multiple ulcers – this patient was sick and died despite a diverting ileostomy in the postoperative period. While 8/13 patients had primary closure of the perforation site, diversion through ileostomy was performed in five patients. All patients did well in the post-operative period except one patient of multiple ulcers and obstructing Meckel’s band who died in the post-operative period. Conclusion:  On encountering a gastrointestinal perforation, no definite symptomatology or its pattern, no clinical examination findings, no intraoperative characteristics of the perforation and no biopsy can definitively point towards Typhoid as the cause. Therefore, we still have to depend on serological tests in correlation with clinical features to reach a conclusive diagnosis. Cultures and PCR, although sensitive are either time-taking or expensive to guide management. Typhoid perforation can have vivid and atypical presentation depending on the number and site of perforation.

No abstract