ArticlePediatric surgery international2024
The use of postoperative calibrations in Hirschsprung disease: a practice to reconsider?
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Updated European Reference Network for rare Inherited and Congenital Digestive and Gastrointestinal Anomalies guidelines for the management of rectosigmoid Hirschsprung's disease 2025.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2026Guideline
- The PODCAST-question: postoperative dilation versus calibration after surgical treatment of Hirschsprung's disease-what is necessary?Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDaily postoperative anal dilations after endorectal pull-through for Hirschsprung disease (HD) are still considered a common practice. We analyzed the potential risks of this procedure and its effectiveness compared to a new internal protocol.
methodsAll infants (< 6 months of age) who underwent transanal endorectal pull-through between January 2021 and January 2023 were prospectively enrolled in a new postoperative protocol group without daily anal dilations (Group A) and compared (1:2 fashion) to those previously treated by postoperative anal dilations (Group B). Patients were matched for age and affected colonic tract. Patients with associated syndromes, extended total intestinal aganglionosis, and presence of enterostomy were excluded. Outcomes considered were: anastomotic complications (stenosis, disruption/leakage), incidence of enterocolitis, and constipation.
resultsEleven patients were included in group A and compared to 22 matched patients (group B). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of anastomotic complications between the two groups. We found a lower incidence of enterocolitis and constipation among group A (p = 0.03 and p = 0.02, respectively).
conclusionA non-dilation strategy after endorectal pull-through could be a feasible alternative and does not significantly increase the risk of postoperative anastomotic complications. Moreover, some preliminary advantages such as lower enterocolitis rate and constipation should be further investigated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38967682What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.