Top

Pediatric Surgery International

Published in:

01-12-2011 | Original Article

Large diaphragmatic defect: are skeletal deformities preventable?

Authors: P. Kuklová, D. Zemková, M. Kyncl, K. Pycha, Z. Straňák, J. Melichar, J. Šnajdauf, M. Rygl

Published in: Pediatric Surgery International | Issue 12/2011

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of study was to compare growth, nutritional status and incidence of chest wall deformities and scoliosis in survivors of large congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) defect (Gore-Tex patch reconstruction) with survivors with smaller defects and primary reconstruction.

Materials and methods

An anthropometric study of 53 children who underwent CDH repair in neonatal period was carried out. Weight, height, and skin-fold thickness were measured, scoliosis and chest wall deformity were evaluated. Body mass index (BMI) and thoracic index (TI) were calculated using standard rules. The measured data were compared with national population standard with the use of standard deviation score (SDS). According to the type of diaphragmatic reconstruction, the patients were divided into two groups [Gore-Tex patch (10) versus primary repair (43)]. Student t test and Fisher exact tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results

Pectus excavatum was found in 25 (47%) patients, poor posture in 33% and significant scoliosis in 5%. Compared with the population norm, CDH children had a significantly lower body height SDS (mean −0.39, p < 0.05), weight SDS (mean −0.75, p < 0.001), BMI (mean SDS −0.68, p < 0.001) and lower TI (mean SDS −0.62, p < 0.01). Gore-Tex versus primary repair group significantly differed in incidence of pectus excavatum and BMI (PE: p = 0.027, BMI SDS: p = 0.016). A majority of anthropometric parameters (weight, height, thoracic index, and thorax circumference) and incidence of scoliosis and poor posture in children after Gore-Tex patch reconstruction did not significantly differ from children after primary repair.

Conclusion

The differences in some anthropometric parameters (weight, BMI, and TI) and in the skeletal deformity suggest that the CDH not only disturbs normal lung growth, but also seems to have implications on some other aspects of somatic development. Whether these changes could be related to the type of diaphragmatic reconstruction or rather to the size of the defect remains uncertain.

Puri P, Wester T (1997) Historical aspects of congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Pediatr Surg Int 12:95–100CrossRef

Lally KP, Lally PA, Lasky RE et al (2007) Defect size determines survival in infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Pediatrics 120:e651–e657PubMedCrossRef

van den Hout L, Sluiter I, Gischler S et al (2009) Can we improve outcome of congenital diaphragmatic hernia? Pediatr Surg Int 25:733–743PubMedCrossRef

Abdullah F, Zhang Y, Sciortino C et al (2009) Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: outcome review of 2,173 surgical repairs in US infants. Pediatr Surg Int 25:1059–1064PubMedCrossRef

Crankson SJ, Al Jadaan SA, Namshan MA et al (2006) The immediate and long-term outcomes of newborns with congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Pediatr Surg Int 22:335–340PubMedCrossRef

Peetsold MG, Kneepkens CM, Heij HA et al (2010) Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: long-term risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 51:448–453

Valfre L, Braguglia A, Conforti A et al (2011) Long term follow-up in high-risk congenital diaphragmatic hernia survivors: patching the diaphragm affects the outcome. J Pediatr Surg 46:52–56

Chen C, Jeruss S, Chapman JS et al (2007) Long-term functional impact of congenital diaphragmatic hernia repair on children. J Pediatr Surg 42:657–665PubMedCrossRef

Peetsold MG, Heij HA, Kneepkens CM et al (2009) The long-term follow-up of patients with a congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a broad spectrum of morbidity. Pediatr Surg Int 25:1–17PubMedCrossRef

10.

Jancelewicz T, Vu LT, Keller RL et al (2010) Long-term surgical outcomes in congenital diaphragmatic hernia: observations from a single institution. J Pediatr Surg 45:155–160 (discussion 160)

11.

Vanamo K, Peltonen J, Rintala R et al (1996) Chest wall and spinal deformities in adults with congenital diaphragmatic defects. J Pediatr Surg 31:851–854PubMedCrossRef

12.

Trachsel D, Selvadurai H, Bohn D et al (2005) Long-term pulmonary morbidity in survivors of congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Pediatr Pulmonol 39:433–439PubMedCrossRef

13.

Brindle ME, Brar M, Skarsgard ED (2011) Patch repair is an independent predictor of morbidity and mortality in congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Pediatr Surg Int. doi:10.1007/s00383-011-2925-1

14.

Grethel EJ, Cortes RA, Wagner AJ et al (2006) Prosthetic patches for congenital diaphragmatic hernia repair: surgisis vs Gore-Tex. J Pediatr Surg 41:29–33 (discussion 29–33)PubMedCrossRef

15.

Sydorak RM, Hoffman W, Lee H et al (2003) Reversed latissimus dorsi muscle flap for repair of recurrent congenital diaphragmatic hernia. J Pediatr Surg 38:296–300 (discussion 296–300)PubMedCrossRef

16.

Doyle NM, Lally KP (2004) The CDH Study Group and advances in the clinical care of the patient with congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Semin Perinatol 28:174–184PubMedCrossRef

17.

Clark RH, Hardin WD Jr, Hirschl RB et al (1998) Current surgical management of congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a report from the Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Study Group. J Pediatr Surg 33:1004–1009PubMedCrossRef

18.

Moss RL, Chen CM, Harrison MR (2001) Prosthetic patch durability in congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a long-term follow-up study. J Pediatr Surg 36:152–154PubMedCrossRef

19.

Rygl M, Pycha K, Stranak Z et al (2007) Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: onset of respiratory distress and size of the defect: analysis of the outcome in 104 neonates. Pediatr Surg Int 23:27–31PubMedCrossRef

20.

Bagolan P, Morini F (2007) Long-term follow up of infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Semin Pediatr Surg 16:134–144PubMedCrossRef

21.

Martin R, Saller K (1957) Lehrbuch der Anthropologie. G. Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart

22.

Fetter V, Prokopec M, Suchý J, Titlbachová S (1967) Antropologie. Academia, Prague

23.

Bláha P, Vignerová J (1999) Vývoj tělesných parametrů českých dětí a mládeže se zaměřením na rozměry hlavy. National Health Institute Czech Republic, Prague

24.

Bláha P, Vignerová J, Riedlová J et al (2005) Sixth national anthropological research of children and youth of Czech Republic 2001. National Health Institute and Charles University, Prague

25.

Vignerová J, Bláha P (2001) Sledování růstu českých dětí a dospívajících. Norma, vyhublost, obezita. National Health Institute and Charles University, Prague

26.

Krásničanová H, Lesný P (2005) Kompendium pediatrické auxologie. Novo Nordisk, Prague

27.

Fumino S, Shimotake T, Kume Y et al (2005) A clinical analysis of prognostic parameters of survival in children with congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Eur J Pediatr Surg 15:399–403PubMedCrossRef

28.

Jaillard SM, Pierrat V, Dubois A et al (2003) Outcome at 2 years of infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a population-based study. Ann Thorac Surg 75:250–256PubMedCrossRef

29.

Muratore CS, Utter S, Jaksic T et al (2001) Nutritional morbidity in survivors of congenital diaphragmatic hernia. J Pediatr Surg 36:1171–1176PubMedCrossRef

30.

Stefanutti G, Filippone M, Tommasoni N et al (2004) Cardiopulmonary anatomy and function in long-term survivors of mild to moderate congenital diaphragmatic hernia. J Pediatr Surg 39:526–531PubMedCrossRef

31.

Chiu PP, Sauer C, Mihailovic A et al (2006) The price of success in the management of congenital diaphragmatic hernia: is improved survival accompanied by an increase in long-term morbidity? J Pediatr Surg 41:888–892PubMedCrossRef

32.

Nasr A, Struijs MC, Ein SH et al. Outcomes after muscle flap vs prosthetic patch repair for large congenital diaphragmatic hernias. J Pediatr Surg 45:151–154

33.

Keijzer R, van de Ven C, Vlot J et al (2010) Thoracoscopic repair in congenital diaphragmatic hernia: patching is safe and reduces the recurrence rate. J Pediatr Surg 45:953–957

34.

Liem NT, Nhat LQ, Tuan TM et al (2011) Thoracoscopic repair for congenital diaphragmatic hernia: experience with 139 cases. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 21:267–270

Title: Large diaphragmatic defect: are skeletal deformities preventable?
Authors: P. Kuklová
D. Zemková
M. Kyncl
K. Pycha
Z. Straňák
J. Melichar
J. Šnajdauf
M. Rygl
Publication date: 01-12-2011
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Pediatric Surgery International / Issue 12/2011
Print ISSN: 0179-0358
Electronic ISSN: 1437-9813
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-011-2973-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Large diaphragmatic defect: are skeletal deformities preventable?

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 12/2011

No association between the SNPs (rs56134796; rs3824934; rs41302375) in the TRPC6 gene promoter and infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis in Chinese people

Gunshot wound of the fetus

Multicentric experience on double dartos flap protection in tubularized incised plate urethroplasty for distal and midpenile hypospadias

Routine histopathological examination of appendectomy specimens in children: is there any rationale?

Escherichia coli translocation in experimental short bowel syndrome: probiotic supplementation and detection by polymerase chain reaction

Recurrent tracheoesophageal fistula after thoracoscopic repair: vanishing clips as a potential sign