Literature DB >> 30415286

Surgical options and trends in treating rectal prolapse: long-term results in a 19-year follow-up study.

Dagfinn Gleditsch1, Wilhelm Andreas Wexels2, Arild Nesbakken3,4,5,6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Many different operations have been proposed for treating rectal prolapse, with varying recurrence rates and functional outcome. The main purpose of this study was to assess long-term results of surgery for prolapse of the rectum.
METHODS: We carried out a retrospective study to evaluate changing trends in surgical strategies and outcome in all patients treated in our hospital over 19 years.
RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were operated and 30 (32%) experienced recurrence of external prolapse during a median (range) follow-up time of 82 (2-231) months. There were 37 reoperations for recurrence, bringing the total number of operations to 130. From 1998 to 2010, laparoscopic posterior suture rectopexy was the preferred abdominal procedure with Delorme's operation as the perineal alternative. Observed recurrence rates were 15/49 (31%) and 8/15 (53%) during a median observation time of 84 and 9 months, respectively. From 2011 to 2017, these procedures were replaced by ventral mesh rectopexy and Altemeier's rectosigmoidectomy. The observed recurrence rate for ventral mesh rectopexy was 3/22 (14%) during a median observation time of 29 months. The 30-day mortality rate was 3% and complication rate 14%.
CONCLUSIONS: The recurrence rates were high after all procedures, with no significant difference between posterior suture rectopexy and ventral mesh rectopexy, but the short observation time for the latter procedure is a limitation of the study. Both procedures had low complication rates, and ventral mesh rectopexy had no mortality.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Mesh repair; Outcome measures; Rectal prolapse; Rectopexy

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30415286     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-018-1728-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  6 in total

1.  Posterior pelvic tilt is a risk factor for rectal prolapse: a propensity score matching analysis.

Authors:  C Cantiani; D Sgamma; E Grossi; D Saccá; O R Meli; Q Lai; F Gaj
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 3.781

2.  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 3.  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

4.  External rectal prolapse: abdominal or perineal repair for men? A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Bang Hu; Qi Zou; Zhenyu Xian; Dan Su; Chao Liu; Li Lu; Minyi Luo; Zixu Chen; Keyu Cai; Han Gao; Hui Peng; Wuteng Cao; Donglin Ren
Journal:  Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf)       Date:  2022-02-21

5.  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

6.  Functional Outcome after Laparoscopic Posterior Sutured Rectopexy Versus Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Six-year Follow-up of a Double-blind, Randomized Single-center Study.

Authors:  Jin Hidaka; Hossam Elfeki; Jakob Duelund-Jakobsen; Søren Laurberg; Lilli Lundby
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2019-08-29
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.