Literature DB >> 27225971

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy vs Delorme's operation in management of complete rectal prolapse: a prospective randomized study.

S H Emile1, H Elbanna1, M Youssef1, W Thabet1, W Omar1, A Elshobaky1, T M Abd El-Hamed1, M Farid1.   

Abstract

AIM: Various surgical operations have been devised for the treatment of rectal prolapse, yet no ideal procedure has been described. The present study aims to compare the clinical and functional outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) and Delorme's operation for complete rectal prolapse.
METHOD: Fifty patients with complete rectal prolapse were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomly selected to undergo either LVMR or Delorme's procedure after clinical, manometric and radiological evaluation. Patient characteristics, operative data, postoperative complications, recurrence of rectal prolapse and continence state were evaluated. Patients were followed for a mean duration of 18 months.
RESULTS: Thirty-one (62%) patients were women and 19 (38%) patients were men with a mean age of 39.7 ± 6.9 years. Patients were allocated into two equal groups: LVMR group and Delorme's group. Thirty-three (66%) complained of faecal incontinence preoperatively. Patients were followed for 18 months. There was no major postoperative complication or treatment death. Improvement in continence was reported in 80.9% of patients (83.3% in group 1 vs 71.4% in group 2). Recurrent prolapse was observed in 16% of patients in group 2 and 8% in group 1 (P = 0.66). The operation time was significantly greater in group 1 and the length of stay greater in group 2. There was no difference in the fall of constipation score between the groups.
CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of recurrence of complete rectal prolapse or postoperative improvement of symptoms between the two groups. Hospital stay was longer after Delorme's procedure but the operation time was shorter. Neither procedure proved definite superiority regarding the clinical and functional outcome at 18 months of follow-up. Colorectal Disease
© 2016 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Delorme; rectal prolapse; ventral mesh rectopexy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27225971     DOI: 10.1111/codi.13399

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 1462-8910            Impact factor:   3.788


  12 in total

Review 1.  Consensus Statement of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR): management and treatment of complete rectal prolapse.

Authors:  G Gallo; J Martellucci; G Pellino; R Ghiselli; A Infantino; F Pucciani; M Trompetto
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2018-12-15       Impact factor: 3.781

2.  Post-surgical fecal incontinence.

Authors:  Filippo Pucciani
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2017-12-30

3.  Outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for full-thickness external rectal prolapse: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of the predictors for recurrence.

Authors:  Sameh Hany Emile; Hossam Elfeki; Mostafa Shalaby; Ahmad Sakr; Pierpaolo Sileri; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Perineal rectosigmoidectomy for rectal prolapse-the preferred procedure for the unfit elderly patient? 10 years experience from a UK tertiary centre.

Authors:  M Alwahid; S R Knight; H Wadhawan; K L Campbell; D Ziyaie; S M P Koch
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2019-11-13       Impact factor: 3.781

5.  Suture rectopexy versus ventral mesh rectopexy for complete full-thickness rectal prolapse and intussusception: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  H S Lobb; C C Kearsey; S Ahmed; R Rajaganeshan
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2021-01-08

Review 6.  Mesh-related complications and recurrence after ventral mesh rectopexy with synthetic versus biologic mesh: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  E M van der Schans; M A Boom; M El Moumni; P M Verheijen; I A M J Broeders; E C J Consten
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 3.781

7.  Abdominal versus perineal approach for external rectal prolapse: systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gianluca Pellino; Giacomo Fuschillo; Costantinos Simillis; Lucio Selvaggi; Giuseppe Signoriello; Danilo Vinci; Christos Kontovounisios; Francesco Selvaggi; Guido Sciaudone
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2022-03-08

8.  Clinical outcomes of surgical management for recurrent rectal prolapse: a multicenter retrospective study.

Authors:  Kwang Dae Hong; Keehoon Hyun; Jun Won Um; Seo-Gue Yoon; Do Yeon Hwang; Jaewon Shin; Dooseok Lee; Se-Jin Baek; Sanghee Kang; Byung Wook Min; Kyu Joo Park; Seung-Bum Ryoo; Heung-Kwon Oh; Min Hyun Kim; Choon Sik Chung; Yong Geul Joh
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 1.766

9.  Massive chronic irreducible rectal prolapse successfully treated with Altemeier's procedure.

Authors:  Noriaki Koizumi; Hiroki Kobayashi; Kanehisa Fukumoto
Journal:  J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2018-04-03

10.  Comparison of four surgical approaches for rectal prolapse: multicentre randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  J Smedberg; W Graf; K Pekkari; F Hjern
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2022-01-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.