Surgery for Hirschsprung's disease: comparison between the Duhamel method and the transanal endorectal pull-through based on 59 patients and a review of the literature

Background:¦Hirschsprung's disease (HSCR) is a congenital malformation of the enteric nervous system due to the¦arrest of migration of neural crest cells to form the myenteric and submucosal plexuses. It leads to an anganglionic intestinal segment, which is permanently contracted causing intestinal obstruction. Its incidence is approximately 1/5000 birth, and males are more frequently affected with a male/female ratio of 4/1. The diagnosis is in most cases made within the first year of life. The rectal biopsy of the mucosa and sub-mucosa is the diagnostic gold standard.¦Purpose:¦The aim of this study was to compare two surgical approaches for HSCR, the Duhamel technique and the transanal endorectal pull-through (TEPT) in term of indications, duration of surgery, duration of hospital stay, postoperative treatment, complications, frequency of enterocolitis and functional outcomes.¦Methods:¦Fifty-nine patients were treated for HSCR by one of the two methods in our department of pediatric¦surgery between 1994 and 2010. These patients were separated into two groups (I: Duhamel, II: TEPT), which were compared on the basis of medical records. Statistics were made to compare the two groups (ANOVA test). The first group includes 43 patients and the second 16 patients. It is noteworthy that twenty-four patients (about 41% of all¦patients) were referred from abroad (Western Africa). Continence was evaluated with the Krickenbeck's score.¦Results:¦Statistically, this study showed that operation duration, hospital stay, postoperative fasting and duration of postoperative antibiotics were significantly shorter (p value < 0.05) in group II (TEPT). But age at operation and length of aganglionic segment showed no significant difference between the two groups. The continence follow-up showed generally good results (Krickenbeck's scores 1; 2.1; 3.1) in both groups with a slight tendency to constipation in group I and soiling in group II.¦Conclusion:¦We found two indications for the Duhamel method that are being referred from a country without¦careful postoperative surveillance and/or having a previous colostomy. Even if the Duhamel technique tends to be replaced by the TEPT, it remains the best operative approach for some selected patients. TEPT has also proved some advantages but must be followed carefully because, among other points, of the postoperative dilatations. Our postoperative standards, like digital rectal examination and anal dilatations seem to reduce the occurrence of complications like rectal spur and anal/anastomosis stenosis, respectively in the Duhamel method and the TEPT technique