4.4 Article

Systemic hypertension in giant omphalocele: An underappreciated association

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY
Volume 50, Issue 9, Pages 1477-1480

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2015.02.051

Keywords

Giant omphalocele; Systemic hypertension; Schuster; Abdominal wall defect; Congenital

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To evaluate the incidence, severity and duration of systemic hypertension in infants born with giant omphalocele (GO). Methods: A retrospective review of patients born from 2003 through 2013 with a GO or intestinal atresia (control population) and managed at a single institution was performed. The hospital course was reviewed including all blood pressures, method of omphalocele repair, requirement for antihypertensive medications and renal function. Results: Forty-five GO and 20 control patients met criteria for the study. Thirty-three GO patients underwent Schuster repair and 12 GO patients underwent delayed repair after epithelialization. Overall, 78% of GO patients had episodes of hypertension (82% Schuster and 67% delayed repair) compared to 15% of control patients (P < 0.001). The majority of episodes were transient and occurred in the postoperative period (97%). Hypertension was persistent in 4 GO patients. These patients required antihypertensive medication at discharge, which was discontinued as an outpatient. No patient demonstrated significant evidence of renal abnormalities as indicated by renal ultrasound, urinalysis and/or serum creatinine level at the time of hypertension. Conclusion: Episodes of systemic hypertension are frequent in patients with GO. Episodes are often post-operative, transient and can be present in patients undergoing either a delayed or Schuster repair. A small subset of patients will have persistent hypertension requiring antihypertensive medication that can be weaned off in an outpatient setting. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available