Literature DB >> 26163960

A Multicenter Collaboration to Assess the Safety of Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy.

Charles Evans1, Andrew R L Stevenson, Pierpaolo Sileri, Mark A Mercer-Jones, Anthony R Dixon, Chris Cunningham, Oliver M Jones, Ian Lindsey.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised regarding the potential risk of mesh complications after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the risk of mesh and nonmesh morbidity after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy and to compare the safety of synthetic meshes with biological grafts.
DESIGN: This was a retrospective review. SETTINGS: The study used data collated from prospective pelvic floor databases in 5 centers (3 in the United Kingdom, 1 in Australia, and 1 in Italy). PATIENTS: All of the patients undergoing laparoscopic ventral rectopexy over a 14-year period (1999-2013) at these centers were included in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was mesh morbidity, classified as vaginal erosion, rectal erosion, rectovaginal fistula, or perineal erosion. Secondary outcomes were nonmesh morbidity.
RESULTS: A total of 2203 patients underwent surgery; 1764 (80.1%) used synthetic mesh and 439 (19.9%) used biological grafts. There were 2 postoperative deaths (0.1%). Forty-five patients (2.0%) had mesh erosion, including 20 vaginal, 17 rectal, 7 rectovaginal fistula, and 1 perineal. Twenty-three patients (51.1%) required treatment for minor erosion morbidity (local excision of stitch/exposed mesh), and 18 patients (40.0%) were treated for major erosion morbidity (12 laparoscopic mesh removal, 3 mesh removal plus colostomy, and 3 anterior resection). Erosion occurred in 2.4% of synthetic meshes and 0.7% of biological meshes. The median time to erosion was 23 months. Nonmesh complications occurred in 11.1% of patients. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study including patients with minimal follow-up. The study was unable to determine whether patients will develop future erosions, currently have asymptomatic erosions, or have been treated in other institutions for erosions.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy is a safe operation. Mesh erosion rates are 2% and occasionally require resectional surgery that might be reduced by the use of biological graft. An international ventral mesh registry is recommended to monitor mesh problems and to assess whether type of mesh has any impact on functional outcomes or the need for revisional surgery for nonerosion problems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26163960     DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000402

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  35 in total

1.  Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for obstructed defecation in patients with overt pelvic structural abnormalities-a Chinese pilot study.

Authors:  G Y Ye; Z Wang; K E Matzel; Z Cui
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Should we offer ventral rectopexy to patients with recurrent external rectal prolapse?

Authors:  Brooke Gurland; Maria Emilia Carvalho E Carvalho; Beri Ridgeway; Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Tracy Hull; Massarat Zutshi
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Comparative study of safety and efficacy of synthetic surgical glue for mesh fixation in ventral rectopexy.

Authors:  Raquel Kelner Silveira; Sophie Domingie; Sylvain Kirzin; Djalma Agripino de Melo Filho; Guillaume Portier
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Biological mesh extrusion months after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy.

Authors:  P Sileri; M Shalaby
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 3.781

5.  Biological mesh extrusion months after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy.

Authors:  P Sileri; M Shalaby; A Orlandi
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2016-11-24       Impact factor: 3.781

6.  Management of patients with rectal prolapse: the 2017 Dutch guidelines.

Authors:  E M van der Schans; T J C Paulides; N A Wijffels; E C J Consten
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2018-08-11       Impact factor: 3.781

7.  Parastomal hernia and prophylactic mesh use during primary stoma formation: a commentary.

Authors:  J-B Cornille; I R Daniels; N J Smart
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 4.739

8.  Current surgical treatment of obstructed defecation among selected European opinion leaders in pelvic floor surgery.

Authors:  M Kim; G Meurette; R Ragu; P A Lehur
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 3.781

9.  Incidence and surgical treatment of synthetic mesh-related infectious complications after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy.

Authors:  F Borie; T Coste; J M Bigourdan; F Guillon
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2016-10-03       Impact factor: 3.781

10.  Anatomo-functional outcomes of the laparoscopic Frykman-Goldberg procedure for rectal prolapse in a tertiary referral centre.

Authors:  Gaetano Gallo; Mario Trompetto; Alberto Realis Luc; Giuseppe Clerico; Giuseppe Sammarco; Eugenio Novelli; Gilda De Paola
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-06-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.