Management of urachal anomalies in pediatric patients: A comparison of treatment strategies between pediatric urology and general surgery

Abstract

Persistence of embryonic urachal structures due to a failure of the urachus to involute into the median umbilical ligament is known as a urachal anomaly (UA). UAs may remain asymptomatic or lead to abdominal pain and recurrent infections. Management of UAs in pediatric patients has historically lacked a clear consensus between conservative and surgical management. While both urologists and general surgeons manage this pathology, a comparison of management style and outcomes between these specialties has not been published to our knowledge. To (1) evaluate trends in management of UAs among pediatric urologists and general surgeons across three tertiary care children's hospitals and (2) identify factors that place patients at higher risk for requiring surgery. All patients diagnosed with a UA from 2016 to 2020at our multi-site institution were identified by ICD-10 code Q64.4 "malformation of the urachus" and retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, treatment specialty, remnant subtype, and management strategy were recorded. Data was dichotomized between both urology and general surgery as well as between surgical and nonsurgical intervention to identify and compare management strategies. Overall, 143 patients diagnosed with UAs were identified. Of these patients, 74 were treated by urology and 69 were treated by general surgery. Patients who were treated by urology were significantly more likely to receive conservative treatment (66.2% treated conservatively vs. 33.8% treated surgically), while patients treated by general surgery were significantly more likely to undergo surgery (84.1% treated surgically vs. 15.9% treated conservatively, p<.0001). Though, urology was more likely to treat patients who presented incidentally (p<.01), and general surgery was more likely to treat patients who presented with an infected remnant (p<.01). Patients of male sex were more likely overall to receive surgery compared to female patients (p<.01). Management of UAs by urologists was more conservative than general surgeons. However, both specialties treat distinctly different patient presentations, with urology managing more incidental remnants and general surgery operating on more emergent, infected urachi. Limitations of the study included its retrospective nature and the insufficient reporting of urachal remnant subtypes and presence of infection among patients. Management strategies of UAs differ among urology and general surgery, but surgical and conservative treatments are necessary to appropriately treat their distinct patient populations. This study provides valuable insight into current practices of UA management and may help to inform future treatment.