Current practice of diagnosis and treatment for rectourethral fistula in male patients with anorectal malformation: a multicenter questionnaire survey in Japan

Abstract Purpose Surgical procedures for anorectoplasty for anorectal malformations (ARMs), particularly rectourethral fistula (RUF), depend on the institution. We investigated the diagnosis and treatment of RUF in male patients with ARMs in Japan using a questionnaire survey. Methods An online survey inquiring about the diagnosis and treatment (diagnostic modalities, surgical approaches, fistula dissection devices, and fistula closure techniques) of each type of ARM in male patients was conducted among institutional members of the Japanese Study Group of Anorectal Anomalies. Fisher’s exact test was used to compare surgical methods between posterior sagittal anorectoplasty (PSARP) and laparoscopy-assisted anorectoplasty (LAARP). Results Sixty-one institutions (100%) completed the survey. LAARP was the preferred approach for high-type ARM (75.4%). PSARP was preferred for intermediate-type ARM (59.0%). Monopolar devices were most commonly used (72.1%) for RUF dissection. Blunt dissection was more frequent in the PSARP group (PSARP vs. LAARP: 55.6 vs. 20.0%, p < 0.005). Cystoscopy/urethroscopy to confirm the extent of dissection was used more frequently in the LAARP group (70.0% vs. 25.0%, p < 0.005). Clips and staplers were used more frequently in the LAARP group ( p < 0.05). Conclusion Distinct fistula management strategies for PSARP and LAARP were revealed. Further studies are needed to investigate the postoperative outcomes associated with these practices.