Evolution of staged versus primary closure of XXXX .

@entity1 @entity29 @entity281 @entity8479 @entity6675
OBJECTIVE: Since the introduction of a preformed silo to the authors' practice in 1997, there has been a decrease in primary closure of @entity6675 . To clarify the impact of this change, the authors reviewed their results over the past 10 years. METHODS: From @entity1 records, the authors abstracted the closure method, mechanical ventilation days, time to full feeds, mechanical and infectious complications, and length of stay. The authors compared groups using the Student t test and the Mann-Whitney test, as appropriate. RESULTS: Between 1993 and the present, 124 @entity1 were identified. Between 1993 and 1997, 38 @entity1 presented with @entity6675 . Thirty-two (84.2%) closures were primary and six (18.8%) were staged. After 1997, the authors treated 80 @entity1 with @entity6675 . There were 27 (33.8%) primary and 53 (66.2%) staged closures. Six @entity1 with other lethal anomalies were excluded. Length of stay and ventilator days were higher for the staged closure group, but @entity281 and mechanical complications were less common in the staged closure group. The time to full feeds did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: A lower incidence of @entity281 and complications related to @entity8479 has made staged closure of @entity6675 more common in the authors' practice. While it has resulted in a longer hospital stay, staged closure decreases the risk of long-term @entity29 and need for reoperation.
