4.2 Article

Sacrococcygeal teratoma: The 13-year experience of a tertiary paediatric centre

期刊

JOURNAL OF PAEDIATRICS AND CHILD HEALTH
卷 47, 期 5, 页码 287-291

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2010.01957.x

关键词

follow up; sacrococcygeal teratoma; teratoma; neonatal

资金

  1. Westmead Association
  2. March of Dimes Foundation [12-FY06-232]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: To describe the management, morbidity and mortality of infants admitted to a tertiary paediatric hospital in New South Wales, Australia with a diagnosis of sacrococcygeal teratoma (SCT). Methods: All neonates admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit with a SCT between January 1996 and December 2008 were included in this retrospective review. Data collected included maternal and neonatal demographics, time of diagnosis, tumour characteristics, surgical treatment, operative complications and outcomes. Results: Seventeen infants with a diagnosis of SCT were included in the study. Of these infants, the majority (70%) were born at term, and eight had a prenatal diagnosis made during the second trimester. Associated anomalies were detected in seven infants (41.8%), with renal anomalies being the most common. Tumour histology included mature (50%, n = 8), yolk sac tumour (18.75%, n = 3), immature (6.25%, n = 1) and mature with mixed elements (25%, n = 4). Recurrent disease occurred in two infants within 4-18 months of the primary resection, with one infant suffering a second recurrence. Only one child died prior to surgery, giving a survival rate of 94%, and mean age at follow-up was 32 months. Long-term sequelae found in four babies included revision of scar, vesicoureteric reflux, post-surgical neurogenic bladder and osteotomy for hip dysplasia. Conclusions: The overall survival of neonatal SCT is high. While this is a small series, our results are consistent with the literature. Important components of management include timely diagnosis, multidisciplinary planning, long-term follow-up and intervention for functional sequelae.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据