Complete rectal prolapse

Kim, Do Sun; Tsang, Charles B.; Wong, W. Douglas; Lowry, Ann C.; Goldberg, Stanley M.; Madoff, Robert D.

doi:10.1007/bf02234167

Cited by 191 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Patients in the PP group had shorter hospital stays, shorter operation times, and higher recurrence rates than patients who had an AP, as shown in previous studies [3,4,15,16,17,18,19]. The PP group was followed up for a shorter time (a median of 4 months less than the AP group), so the recurrence rate at set intervals would be higher for the PP patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

“…Complete rectal prolapse is full-thickness rectal wall prolapse. It is usually associated with a long history of constipation, and with varying degrees of faecal incontinence [2,3]. For this reason, when surgeons select which operational procedure to use, they should consider not only functional results following surgery but also other facts about the patient such as age, sex, comorbidity and the extent of prolapse.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Complete rectal prolapse has been studied in various subjects, and some studies have compared abdominal and perineal procedures [1,6]. Abdominal procedures (APs) generally offer lower rates of recurrence but are associated with higher morbidity rates than perineal procedures [1,3,7]. These results might help to select suitable operative procedures for patients with complete rectal prolapse.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of abdominal and perineal procedures for complete rectal prolapse: an analysis of 104 patients

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeSelecting the best surgical approach for treating complete rectal prolapse involves comparing the operative and functional outcomes of the procedures. The aims of this study were to evaluate and compare the operative and functional outcomes of abdominal and perineal surgical procedures for patients with complete rectal prolapse.MethodsA retrospective study of patients with complete rectal prolapse who had operations at a tertiary referral hospital and a university hospital between March 1990 and May 2011 was conducted. Patients were classified according to the type of operation: abdominal procedure (AP) (n = 64) or perineal procedure (PP) (n = 40). The operative outcomes and functional results were assessed.ResultsThe AP group had the younger and more men than the PP group. The AP group had longer operation times than the PP group (165 minutes vs. 70 minutes; P = 0.001) and longer hospital stays (10 days vs. 7 days; P = 0.001), but a lower overall recurrence rate (6.3% vs. 15.0%; P = 0.14). The overall rate of the major complication was similar in the both groups (10.9% vs. 6.8%; P = 0.47). The patients in the AP group complained more frequently of constipation than of incontinence, conversely, in the PP group of incontinence than of constipation.ConclusionThe two approaches for treating complete rectal prolapse did not differ with regard to postoperative morbidity, but the overall recurrence tended to occur frequently among patients in the PP group. Functional results after each surgical approach need to be considered for the selection of procedure.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of abdominal and perineal procedures for complete rectal prolapse: an analysis of 104 patients

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[14] A variety of open abdominal surgical procedures have been practiced for the treatment of complete prolapse of the rectum. [15161718] 14 patients had redundant sigmoid colon who underwent resection and anastomosis of recto-sigmoid. All these 14 patients underwent suture rectopexy laparoscopically and none underwent mesh rectopexy, hence these patients were excluded from the study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A single centre comparative study of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy versus suture rectopexy

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM:The aim of our study is to compare the results of laparoscopic mesh vs. suture rectopexy.MATERIALS AND METHODS:In this retrospective study, 70 patients including both male and female of age ranging between 20 years and 65 years (mean 42.5 yrs) were subjected to laparoscopic rectopexy during the period between March 2007 and June 2012, of which 38 patients underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy and 32 patients laparoscopic suture rectopexy. These patients were followed up for a mean period of 12 months assessing first bowel movement, hospital stay, duration of surgery, faecal incontinence, constipation, recurrence and morbidity.RESULTS:Duration of surgery was 100.8 ± 12.4 minutes in laparoscopic suture rectopexy and 120 ± 10.8 min in laparoscopic mesh rectopexy. Postoperatively, the mean time for the first bowel movement was 38 hrs and 40 hrs, respectively, for suture and mesh rectopexy. Mean hospital stay was five (range: 4-7) days. There was no significant postoperative complication except for one port site infection in mesh rectopexy group. Patients who had varying degree of incontinence preoperatively showed improvement after surgery. Eleven out of 18 (61.1%) patients who underwent laparoscopic suture rectopexy as compared to nine of 19 (47.3%) patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy improved as regards constipation after surgery.CONCLUSION:There were no significant difference in both groups who underwent surgery except for patients undergoing suture rectopexy had better symptomatic improvement of continence and constipation. Also, cost of mesh used in laparoscopic mesh rectopexy is absent in lap suture rectopexy group. To conclude that laparoscopic suture rectopexy is a safe and feasible procedure and have comparable results as regards operative time, morbidity, bowel function, cost and recurrence or even slightly better results than mesh rectopexy.

show abstract

“…Full-thickness rectal prolapse is a benign but distressing condition that leads to problems with bleeding, fecal incontinence and obstructed defecation[1–3]. Rectal prolapse can significantly affect a patient’s quality of life and therefore should be repaired whenever possible.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changing approaches to rectal prolapse repair in the elderly

Poylin

Bensley

Nagle

2013

Gastroenterology Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The abdominal approach to rectal prolapse is associated with lower rates of recurrence but a higher chance of complications and has been traditionally reserved for younger patients. However, longer life expectancy and wider use of laparoscopic techniques necessitates another look at the abdominal approach in older patients.Methods: This was a retrospective review of data from patients undergoing abdominal repair of rectal prolapse between 2005 and 2011.Results: Forty-six abdominal repairs (laparoscopic or open suture rectopexy, sigmoidectomy and rectopexy and low anterior resection) were performed during the study period. Twenty-nine repairs (63%) were performed in patients under the age of 70 (average age 51) and 17 (37%) in patients older than 70 (average age 76; range 71–89). Most of the cases performed during the initial 3 years of the study were via laparotomy. However, in the last 4 years, the laparoscopic approach was used in 83% of younger patients and 69% of older patients. Average length of stay was 2.6 days for younger and 3.8 days for older patients. Both groups had similar rates of re-admission: 20% vs 23%. The rate of wound infection was higher in the younger patients (5% vs nil). However, rates of urinary tract infection, two instances (10%) vs four (30%), urinary retention, one instance (5%) vs two (15.4%), ileus, one instance (5%) vs two (15.4%) were higher in the older group.Conclusion: Wider use of laparoscopy has precipitated a change in the approach to rectal prolapse in older patients. Although associated with a slightly higher rate of post-operative complications, the abdominal approach to rectal prolapse is feasible, safe and effective in patients older than 70 years.

show abstract

Complete rectal prolapse

Cited by 191 publications

References 21 publications

Comparison of abdominal and perineal procedures for complete rectal prolapse: an analysis of 104 patients

Comparison of abdominal and perineal procedures for complete rectal prolapse: an analysis of 104 patients

A single centre comparative study of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy versus suture rectopexy

Changing approaches to rectal prolapse repair in the elderly

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About