OBJECTIVE: Rectopexy is the most common technique used to correct rectal prolapse. Perineal procedures such as the Delorme technique and others are employed for older frail patients with significant comorbidity because of the higher recurrence rate. This study evaluated results of the Delorme technique and rectopexy. METHODS: Retrospective study of 31 patients with rectal prolapse treated from 1997 to 2005. Among them, 15 patients (group A) were treated by rectopexy and 16 by the Delorme technique (group B). Analysis of hospital stay, morbidity, complications and recurrence rate was carried out. RESULTS: There was longer hospital stay, seven days (3 to 11days) in group A, compared to four days (2 to 6 days) in group B. Recurrence rate was similar, respectively 13.3% and 6.6% (not significant). Most patients presented low rest and squeezing pressure, although half of them became fully continent after surgery (group A=53% and group B =50%). Morbidity was 40% and 18.9%, respectively for groups A and B. Sacral hemorrhage occurred in one patient and was controlled during rectopexy. A case of bleeding occurred in group B and ceased spontaneously without surgical procedure. There was a rectal stricture in group B treated successfully with digital dilatation at the doctor's office. CONCLUSION: The Delorme technique for treatment of rectal prolapse is a safe procedure and presents results similar to rectopexy. In addition it also has lower morbidity, and could be more often indicated.
OBJECTIVE: Rectopexy is the most common technique used to correct rectal prolapse. Perineal procedures such as the Delorme technique and others are employed for older frail patients with significant comorbidity because of the higher recurrence rate. This study evaluated results of the Delorme technique and rectopexy. METHODS: Retrospective study of 31 patients with rectal prolapse treated from 1997 to 2005. Among them, 15 patients (group A) were treated by rectopexy and 16 by the Delorme technique (group B). Analysis of hospital stay, morbidity, complications and recurrence rate was carried out. RESULTS: There was longer hospital stay, seven days (3 to 11days) in group A, compared to four days (2 to 6 days) in group B. Recurrence rate was similar, respectively 13.3% and 6.6% (not significant). Most patients presented low rest and squeezing pressure, although half of them became fully continent after surgery (group A=53% and group B =50%). Morbidity was 40% and 18.9%, respectively for groups A and B. Sacral hemorrhage occurred in one patient and was controlled during rectopexy. A case of bleeding occurred in group B and ceased spontaneously without surgical procedure. There was a rectal stricture in group B treated successfully with digital dilatation at the doctor's office. CONCLUSION: The Delorme technique for treatment of rectal prolapse is a safe procedure and presents results similar to rectopexy. In addition it also has lower morbidity, and could be more often indicated.