PURPOSE: Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) is an established surgical technique for the treatment of both rectal prolapse and symptomatic rectoceles. It is, however, not known whether LVR influences sexual function (SF). The aim of this study was, therefore, to determine the impact of this procedure on the SF of patients. METHODS: All female patients after LVR procedure in a single institution were identified and were sent a questionnaire concerning SF. This addressed sexual activity, satisfaction, preoperative SF, and the impact of surgery on SF. Furthermore, the PISQ-12 validated sexual functioning questionnaire was sent to all female patients. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients were sent a questionnaire. These patients underwent LVR for rectal prolapse, symptomatic rectocele, or enterocele between 2004 and 2011. Mean age was 62 years (range 22-89). Mean follow-up was 30 months (range 5-83). Response rate was 64 % (139 patients). The number of sexual active patients dropped from 71 to 54 % after surgery. The number of patients being satisfied with their SF remained relatively equal; 91 % of patients before and 85 % of patients after surgery. Forty-three percent of patients stated that the LVR procedure did not influence their sexual function, in 16 % of patients, the procedure positively influenced their SF, and in 13 % of respondents, SF decreased after surgery. The mean PISQ-12 score postoperatively was 34 out of 48. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of LVR on SF of patients seems limited in this cross-sectional study in a large cohort of patients.
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) is an established surgical technique for the treatment of both rectal prolapse and symptomatic rectoceles. It is, however, not known whether LVR influences sexual function (SF). The aim of this study was, therefore, to determine the impact of this procedure on the SF of patients. METHODS: All female patients after LVR procedure in a single institution were identified and were sent a questionnaire concerning SF. This addressed sexual activity, satisfaction, preoperative SF, and the impact of surgery on SF. Furthermore, the PISQ-12 validated sexual functioning questionnaire was sent to all female patients. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients were sent a questionnaire. These patients underwent LVR for rectal prolapse, symptomatic rectocele, or enterocele between 2004 and 2011. Mean age was 62 years (range 22-89). Mean follow-up was 30 months (range 5-83). Response rate was 64 % (139 patients). The number of sexual activepatients dropped from 71 to 54 % after surgery. The number of patients being satisfied with their SF remained relatively equal; 91 % of patients before and 85 % of patients after surgery. Forty-three percent of patients stated that the LVR procedure did not influence their sexual function, in 16 % of patients, the procedure positively influenced their SF, and in 13 % of respondents, SF decreased after surgery. The mean PISQ-12 score postoperatively was 34 out of 48. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of LVR on SF of patients seems limited in this cross-sectional study in a large cohort of patients.
Authors: Alfredo L Milani; Mariella I J Withagen; Hok S The; Ileana Nedelcu-van der Wijk; Mark E Vierhout Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2011-07-28 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: J W van den Esschert; A A W van Geloven; N Vermulst; A G Groenedijk; A Groenedijk; L Th de Wit; M F Gerhards Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-03-05 Impact factor: 4.584