Surgical treatment of recurrent complete rectal prolapse: a thirty-year experience

Recurrence Rates and Risk Factors in the Altemeier Procedure for Rectal Prolapse: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Perineal proctosigmoidectomy (Altemeier) is a surgical procedure that is commonly used for the treatment of rectal prolapse. However, there is a diverse range of recurrence rates after Altemeier procedure repair that has been reported in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

To identify primary and subsequent recurrence rates after perineal proctosigmoidectomy and to define potential risk factors for recurrence.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTINGS

Conducted at 6 hospitals affiliated with the Cleveland Clinic.

PATIENTS

The study included patients who were older than 18 years and were treated with the Altemeier procedure for rectal prolapse between 2007 and 2022.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were rates of primary and subsequent recurrences. Secondary outcomes included potential risk factors for recurrence previously mentioned in the literature.

RESULTS

We identified 182 patients, of whom 95.1% were women, with a mean age of 79 years (SD 11.4). Overall, procedures were elective in 92.1% of patients, and 14.3% had previously undergone prolapse repairs (Delorme, Thiersch, abdominal suture rectopexy, and abdominal mesh rectopexy). At a mean follow-up period of 27.5 months (SD 45.7), 37.9% of patients experienced recurrence, with 16.5% of patients having multiple recurrences. A subsequent Altemeier procedure was performed in 72.5% of instances. Other treatments included Delorme, abdominal suture rectopexy, abdominal mesh rectopexy, or conservative management. This study identified connective tissue disorders and time since surgery as significant risk factors for recurrence.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design and varying follow-up periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Perineal proctosigmoidectomy is associated with a significant risk of recurrence. The risk of recurrence increased with the presence of a connective tissue disorder and in proportion to the elapsed time since surgery. These discoveries assist health care professionals in counseling and managing patients who undergo perineal proctosigmoidectomy for rectal prolapse. See Video Abstract .

TASAS DE RECURRENCIA Y FACTORES DE RIESGO EN EL PROCEDIMIENTO DE ALTEMEIER PARA EL PROLAPSO RECTAL UN ESTUDIO MULTICNTRICO

ANTECEDENTES:La proctosigmoidectomía perineal (Altemeier) es un procedimiento quirúrgico que se utiliza comúnmente para el tratamiento del prolapso rectal. Sin embargo, existe una amplia gama de tasas de recurrencia después de la reparación con el procedimiento de Altemeier que se han informado en la literatura.OBJETIVO:Nuestro objetivo fue identificar las tasas de recurrencia primaria y posterior después de la proctosigmoidectomía perineal, así como definir los posibles factores de riesgo de recurrencia.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte.AJUSTES:Realizado en 6 hospitales afiliados a la Clínica Cleveland.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes mayores de 18 años que fueron tratados con procedimiento de Altemeier por prolapso rectal entre 2007 y 2022.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Los resultados primarios fueron las tasas de recurrencias primarias y posteriores. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron factores de riesgo potenciales de recurrencia mencionados anteriormente en la literatura.RESULTADOS:Se identificaron 182 pacientes, de los cuales el 95,1% eran mujeres con una edad media de 79 años (DE 11,4). En general, el 92,1% fueron electivos y el 14,3% se habían sometido previamente a reparaciones de prolapso (Delorme, Thiersch, rectopexia con sutura abdominal y rectopexia con malla abdominal). En un período de seguimiento medio de 27,5 meses (DE 45,7), el 37,9% de los pacientes experimentó recurrencia, y el 16,5% de los pacientes tuvo recurrencias múltiples. En el 72,5% de los casos se realizó un procedimiento de Altemeier posterior. Otros tratamientos incluyeron Delorme, rectopexia con sutura abdominal, rectopexia con malla abdominal o manejo conservador. Este estudio identificó los trastornos del tejido conectivo y el tiempo transcurrido desde la cirugía como factores de riesgo importantes de recurrencia.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo y períodos de seguimiento variables.CONCLUSIÓN:La proctosigmoidectomía perineal se asocia con un riesgo significativo de recurrencia. El riesgo de recurrencia aumentó con la presencia de un trastorno del tejido conectivo y en proporción al tiempo transcurrido desde la cirugía. Estos descubrimientos ayudan a los profesionales de la salud a asesorar y tratar a los pacientes que se someten a proctosigmoidectomía perineal por prolapso rectal. (Traducción-Dr. Ingrid Melo ).

Sigmoido-rectal intussusception anastomosis in the Altemeier procedure for complete rectal prolapse: preliminary results of a new technique

Purpose

Our research introduces an innovative surgical approach, combining the Altemeier Procedure with Sigmoido-rectal Intussusception Anastomosis, effectively reducing recurrence, minimizing complications, and improving postoperative anal function in rectal prolapse patients.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study, conducted at tertiary referral hospitals including Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine's Affiliated Hospital, Linyi People's Hospital, and Pingyi People's Hospital, examined data from patients undergoing conventional Altemeier surgery or Altemeier combined with Sigmoido-rectal Intussusception Anastomosis. Analyzing hospitalization and follow-up data from January 2009 to December 2022, the study focused on prolapse recurrence, complications, and anal function as primary outcome indicators across these three study centers.

Results

In the study, both groups had an average follow-up of (12.5 ± 2.41) months, and only two traditional group patients experienced mortality. Recurrence rates significantly differed, with 26.47% in the traditional group and 1.54% in the modified group (P < 0.001). The modified group showed no perioperative anastomotic dehiscence, contrasting with a 13.24% occurrence in the conventional group (P = 0.003). Primary complications in the modified group included anastomotic hemorrhage, with rates of 17.65% and 6.15% in the traditional and modified groups, respectively (P = 0.077). At 12 months postoperatively, both groups improved in anal manometry parameters and the Wexner anal incontinence score. Resting pressure was significantly lower in the traditional group (32.50 ± 1.76 mmHg) than the modified group (33.24 ± 2.06 mmHg) (P = 0.027), while the extrusion pressure was higher in the modified group (64.78 ± 1.55 mmHg) than the traditional group (62.85 ± 2.30 mmHg) (P < 0.001). The Wexner anal incontinence score was significantly lower in the modified group (2.69 ± 1.65) than the traditional group (3.69 ± 1.58, P = 0.001).

Conclusion

This retrospective study affirms that adding Sigmoido-rectal Intussusception Anastomosis to the Altemeier procedure reduces recurrence and complications. While both approaches enhance postoperative anal function in complete rectal prolapse patients, the combined method, particularly with Sigmoido-rectal Intussusception Anastomosis, proves more effective.

Comparison of abdominal and perineal approach for recurrent rectal prolapse

Purpose

Rectal prolapse is a benign disease in which the rectum protrudes below the anus. Although many studies have been reported on the treatment of primary rectal prolapse for many years, there is a lack of treatment or clinical research results on recurrent rectal prolapse. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of surgical approaches for recurrent rectal prolapse.

Methods

We studied patients who underwent surgical treatment for recurrent rectal prolapse disease from March 2016 to February 2021. We analyzed the previous operation methods in patients with recurrent rectal prolapse, as well as the operation time, complication rate, hospital stay, and re-recurrence rates in the perineal and abdominal approach groups.

Results

Out of a total of 239 patients, 41 patients who underwent surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse were retrospectively enrolled. Recurrent rectal prolapses were surgically treated either by the perineal approach (n = 25, 61.0%) or by the abdominal approach (n = 16, 39.0%). The operation times were significantly longer in the abdominal approach than in the perineal approach (98.44 minutes vs. 58.00 minutes, P = 0.001). Hospital stay was significantly longer in the abdominal approach than in the perineal approach (9.19 days vs. 6.00 days, P = 0.012). Re-recurrence rate after repeat repair was not significantly different between the 2 groups (P = 0.777).

Conclusion

Although the perineal approach shortened the operation time and hospital stay, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in postoperative complications and re-recurrence rate. Both approaches can be good surgical options for the treatment of recurrent rectal prolapse.

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

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Pregnancy after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: implications and outcomes

AIM

Surgical management of rectal prolapse varies considerably. Most surgeons are reluctant to use ventral mesh rectopexy in young women until they have completed their family. The aim of the present study was to review outcomes of pregnancy following laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy from a tertiary referral centre over a 10-year period (2006-2016) and to review the impact on pelvic floor symptoms.

METHOD

We undertook a retrospective review of a prospectively compiled database of patients who had undergone laparoscopic ventral rectopexy in a single centre over a 10-year period. Pelvic floor symptom scores (Vaizey for incontinence and Longo for obstructive defaecation) were collected at initial presentation (pre-intervention), post-intervention and after child birth.

RESULTS

In all, 954 rectopexies were performed over this 10-year period. 225 (24%) patients were women and under 45 years of age (taken as an arbitrary cut-off for decreased likelihood of pregnancy). Eight (4%) of these patients became pregnant following rectopexy. The interval between rectopexy and delivery was 42 months (21-50). Six patients delivered live babies by elective lower segment caesarean section and two by spontaneous vaginal delivery. Six were first babies and two were second. No mesh related adverse outcome was reported. No difference in pelvic floor symptoms was demonstrated on comparison of post-rectopexy and post-delivery scores.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first description in the English language literature of safe delivery by elective lower segment caesarean section or spontaneous vaginal delivery following laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. No adverse impact on pelvic floor related quality of life was detected.

Optimizing Treatment for Rectal Prolapse

Rectal prolapse is associated with debilitating symptoms and leads to both functional impairment and anatomic distortion. Symptoms include rectal bulge, mucous drainage, bleeding, incontinence, constipation, tenesmus, as well as discomfort, pressure, and pain. The only cure is surgical. The optimal surgical repair is not yet defined though laparoscopic rectopexy with mesh is emerging as a more durable approach. The chosen approach should be individually tailored, taking into account factors such as presence of pelvic floor defects and coexistence of vaginal prolapse, severe constipation, surgical fitness, and whether the patient has had a previous prolapse procedure. Consideration of a multidisciplinary approach is critical in patients with concomitant vaginal prolapse. Surgeons must weigh their familiarity with each approach and should have in their armamentarium both perineal and abdominal approaches. Previous barriers to abdominal procedures, such as age and comorbidities, are waning as minimally invasive approaches have gained acceptance. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy is one such approach offering relatively low morbidity, low recurrence rates, and good functional improvement. However, proficiency with this procedure may require advanced training. Robotic rectopexy is another burgeoning approach which facilitates suturing in the pelvis. Successful rectal prolapse surgeries improve function and have low recurrence rates, though it is important to note that correcting the prolapse does not assure functional improvement.

A systematic review of the literature on the surgical management of recurrent rectal prolapse

AIM

There are no available guidelines to support surgical decision-making in recurrent rectal prolapse. This systematic review evaluated the results of abdominal or perineal surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse, with the aim of developing an evidence-based treatment algorithm.

METHOD

PubMed and MEDLINE databases were searched for all clinical studies involving patients who underwent surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse between 1950 and 2014. The primary outcome measure was the recurrence rate after abdominal or perineal surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse. Secondary outcomes included morbidity, mortality and quality of life data where available.

RESULTS

There were no randomized controlled studies comparing the success rates of abdominal or perineal surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse. Most studies were heterogeneous, of low quality (level IV) and involved small numbers of patients. The follow-up of 144 patients included in the studies undergoing perineal surgery ranged from 8.8 to 81 months, with recurrence rates varying from 0% to 50%. Morbidity ranged from 0% to 17% with no mortality reported. Limited data on quality of life following the Altemeier procedure were available. The follow-up for 158 patients included in the studies who underwent abdominal surgery ranged from 0 to 23 years, during which recurrence rates varied from 0% to 15%. Morbidity rates ranged from 0% to 32% with 4% mortality. No quality of life data were available for patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review was unable to develop a treatment algorithm for recurrent rectal prolapse due to the variety of surgical techniques described and the low level of evidence within heterogeneous studies. Larger high-quality studies are necessary to guide practice in this difficult area.

Case-matched series of a non-cross-linked biologic versus non-absorbable mesh in laparoscopic ventral rectopexy

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) is an emerging technique for selected patients with rectal prolapse and obstructed defaecation syndrome. Data are insufficient to conclude which type of mesh affords the greatest benefit. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of LVR using a non-cross-linked biologic versus a permanent mesh.

METHODS

Twenty nine cases of LVR with permanent mesh were matched based on age and surgical indication with an equal number of patients using biologic mesh. Cases were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Symptom resolution, patient satisfaction and recurrence of prolapse were measured among those who underwent LVR with either a biologic (Biodesign(®), Cook Medical) or polypropylene mesh.

RESULTS

Age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, surgical indication and primary symptoms were not different between the two groups. After a median follow-up of 15.4 months, all patients reported being either completely or partially satisfied. Rates of complete or partial symptom resolution (p = 0.26) or satisfaction (p = 0.27) did not differ between groups. After LVR, similar rates of additional procedures were performed in the biologic (21 %) and the permanent (28 %) mesh group. Among patients with full-thickness prolapse (n = 33), there were five cases (15 %) of recurrence, one in the biologic group and four in the permanent mesh group (p = 0.37). There were no mesh-related complications in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

LVR using a non-cross-linked biologic mesh appears to have comparable rates of symptom improvement and patient satisfaction in the short term. Longer follow-up will be required to determine if prolapse recurrence depends on mesh type.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic suture rectopexy for complete rectal prolapse complicated by a solitary ulcer and obstructed defecation: a case report and review of the literature

Introduction

Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome is a condition in which an ulcer occurs in the rectum. There is evidence that solitary rectal ulcer syndrome is associated with rectal prolapse either overt or occult and that stopping complete rectal prolapse may lead to rapid healing of the solitary rectal ulcer. A huge variety of operative techniques have been described in the literature to correct this condition. We present the case of a patient who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic suture rectopexy for complete rectal prolapse complicated by a solitary ulcer and obstructed defecation.

Case presentation

A 32-year-old Caucasian woman presented to our institute complaining of having had difficulty with her bowel movements, a rectal prolapse and pain in the anal area for one and a half years. She was checked in hospital for suspected rectal carcinoma, however, the examination revealed rectal ulceration. A diagnosis of complete rectal prolapse complicated by a solitary ulcer and obstructed defecation was established. The symptoms persisted so a hand-assisted laparoscopic suture rectopexy was performed. After six months of follow-up, her bowel movements had improved, she was experiencing no pain and the rectal ulcer had healed.

Conclusion

A hand-assisted laparoscopic suture rectopexy is a feasible and safe surgical treatment of rectal prolapse with solitary rectal ulcer syndrome, providing complete recovery for patients with solitary rectal ulcer syndrome.

Rectal prolapse

Optimal management of rectal prolapse requires multiple clinical considerations with respect to treatment options, particularly for surgeons who must counsel and give realistic expectations to rectal prolapse patients. Rectal prolapse outcomes are good with respect to recurrence. Although posterior rectopexy remains most popular in the United States, increasingly surgeons perform ventral rectopexy to repair rectal prolapse. Functional outcomes vary and are fair after rectal prolapse repair. Although incarceration with rectal prolapse is rare, it is potentially life threatening and requires immediate and effective measures to adequately address in the acute setting.

Perineal rectosigmoidectomy for primary and recurrent rectal prolapse: are the results comparable the second time?

BACKGROUND

The surgical approach to recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse after perineal rectosigmoidectomy is complicated by recurrent prolapse. The majority of patients who undergo perineal rectosigmoidectomy are elderly with comorbidities. Therefore, redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy is usually selected to avoid postoperative complications.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy for recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

This study was conducted at Cleveland Clinic Florida, from January 2000 to March 2009.

PATIENTS

One hundred thirty-six patients (129 women), mean age 78 (range, 31-98) years, were included in the study; 113 patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse underwent primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy, and 23 patients with recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse underwent redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy.

INTERVENTIONS

All patients underwent perineal rectosigmoidectomy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Perioperative outcomes, recurrence curves, and risk of recurrence were compared between the 2 groups. Age, anterior compartment prolapse, concurrent levatorplasty, and length of bowel resection were analyzed to identify factors potentially influencing recurrence.

RESULTS

Both groups had comparable demographics, BMI, and ASA scores. Operative time, blood loss, length of bowel resection, hospital stay, and follow-up (mean, 42.5 months) were similar in both groups. There was no significant difference in overall complication rates (redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy 17.4% vs. primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy 16.8%; p = 1.00). The recurrence rate for full-thickness rectal prolapse was significantly higher for redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy than primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy (39% vs. 18%; p = 0.007). None of the factors analyzed was associated with recurrence in either group.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective methodology. In addition, functional outcomes were not evaluated, because many of the patients died during the follow-up period or were unavailable because of advanced age.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy is as safe and feasible as primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy in elderly and fragile patients with recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse. However, the re-recurrence rate for full-thickness rectal prolapse is substantially higher for redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy than primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy.

Rectal prolapse

Despite the innovation of more than 100 surgical procedures for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse, no one procedure is best and applicable to all patients. Traditionally, procedures have been divided into abdominal and perineal approaches. The application of the laparoscopic approach to colon and rectal disease has allowed an additional less invasive method of therapy to treat rectal prolapse successfully. In comparison with conventional approaches, laparoscopy has achieved similar functional results and recurrence rates while reducing postoperative pain and hospital length of stay.

Laparoscopic management of rectal prolapse

Rectal prolapse can be a disabling condition for those affected. Treatment has historically been by transanal or abdominal approaches, with transanal approaches tending to have lower morbidity, and abdominal approaches having lower recurrence rates. With the advent of laparoscopy, many of the numerous described abdominal operations have been reported with a minimally invasive approach. Although few randomized data exist, laparoscopic operations appear to provide equal rectal fixation to open surgery, with less morbidity. Coexistent symptoms such as fecal incontinence and constipation must be evaluated before surgery, so that the operation can be tailored to the needs of the individual patient. Patients with severe constipation are often offered a concomitant sigmoid resection, although this does increase the potential for complications. Patients with incontinence, diarrhea, or otherwise normal function can be offered a rectopexy without resection.

Management of recurrent rectal prolapse: surgical approach influences outcome

INTRODUCTION

Recurrent rectal prolapse is an unresolved problem and the optimal treatment is debated. This study was designed to review patterns of care and outcomes in a large cohort of patients after surgery for recurrent prolapse.

METHODS

From 685 patients who underwent operative repair for full-thickness external rectal prolapse, we identified 78 patients (70 females; mean age, 66.9 years) who underwent surgery for recurrence. We reviewed the subsequent management and outcomes for these 78 patients.

RESULTS

Mean interval to their first recurrence was 33 (range, 1-168) months. There were significantly more re-recurrences after reoperation using a perineal procedure (19/51) compared with an abdominal procedure (4/27) for their recurrent rectal prolapse (P = 0.03) at a mean follow-up of nine (range, 1-82) months. Patients undergoing abdominal repair of recurrence were significantly younger than those who underwent perineal repair (mean age, 58.5 vs. 71.5 years; P < 0.01); however, there was nosignificant difference between the two groups with regard to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (P = 0.89). Eighteen patients had surgery for a second recurrence, with perineal repairs associated with higher failure rates (50 vs. 8 percent; P = 0.07). Finally, when combining all repairs, the abdominal approach continued to have significantly lower recurrence rates (39 vs. 13 percent; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The re-recurrence rate after surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse is high, even at a relatively short follow-up interval. Our data suggest that abdominal repair of recurrent rectal prolapse should be undertaken if the patient's risk profile permits this approach.

Long-term outcome after laparoscopic and open surgery for rectal prolapse: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic repair (LR) of rectal prolapse is potentially associated with earlier recovery and lower perioperative morbidity, as compared with open transabdominal repair (OR). Data on the long-term recurrence rate and functional outcome are limited.

METHODS

Perioperative data on rectal prolapse in relation to all LRs performed between December 1991 and April 2004 were prospectively collected. The LR patients were matched by age, gender, and procedure type with OR patients who underwent surgery during the same period. Patients with previous complex abdominal surgery or a body mass index exceeding 40 were excluded from the study. Data on recurrence rate, bowel habits, continence, and satisfaction scores were collected using a telephone survey.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients (age, 56.8 +/- 18.1 years; female, 87%) underwent attempted LR. An operative complication deferred repair in two cases. Among the 111 patients, 42 had posterior mesh fixation, and 67 had sutured rectopexy (32 patients with sigmoid colectomy for constipation). Eight patients (7.2%) had conversion to laparotomy. Matching was established for 86 patients. The LR patients had a shorter hospital stay (mean, 3.9 vs 6.0 days; p < 0.0001). The 30-day reoperation and readmission rates were similar for the two groups. The rates for recurrence requiring surgery were 9.3% for LR and 4.7% for OR (p = 0.39) during a mean follow-up period of 59 months. An additional seven patients in each group reported possible recurrence by telephone. Postoperatively, 35% of the LR patients and 53% of the OR patients experienced constipation (p = 0.09). Constipation was improved in 74% of the LR patients and 54% of the OR patients, and worsened, respectively, in 3% and 17% (p = 0.037). The postoperative incontinence rates were 30% for LR and 33% for OR (p = 0.83). Continence was improved in 48% of the LR patients and 35% of the OR patients, and worsened, respectively, in 9% and 18% (p = 0.22). The mean satisfaction rates for surgery (on a scale of 0 to 10) were 7.3 for the LR patients and 8.1 for the OR patients (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

The hospital stay is shorter for LR than for OR. Both functional results and recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse were similar for LR and OR during a mean follow-up period of 5 years.

Long-term results of Delorme's procedure and Orr-Loygue rectopexy to treat complete rectal prolapse

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess long-term outcome of Orr-Loygue rectopexy and Delorme's procedures in total rectal prolapse management.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively from 1978 to 2001. Statistical analysis was performed by chi-squared test and Student's t -test.

RESULTS

One hundred nine patients underwent either a Orr-Loygue rectopexy (49 patients) or a Delorme's procedure (60 patients). Mean follow-up was 88 (range, 1-300) months. In the rectopexy group, the overall complication rate and the recurrence rate were 33 percent and 4 percent, respectively. In patients with preoperative constipation, this symptom was improved or completely resolved in 33 percent and worsened in 58 percent postoperatively. Seventy-three percent of patients with preoperative incontinence were continent or had continence improvement postoperatively. In Delorme's group, overall complication and recurrence rates were 15 percent and 23 percent, respectively. Mortality was 7 percent. In patients with preoperative constipation, this symptom was improved or completely resolved in 54 percent and worsened in 12.5 percent of patients postoperatively. Forty-two percent of patients with preoperative incontinence were continent or had continence improvement postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, Orr-Loygue rectopexy had a lower long-term recurrence rate. However, this surgical procedure is associated with a higher complication rate. We believe that Delorme's procedure is still a valuable option in selected patients with postoperative minimal morbidity but higher recurrence rate.

Surgical intervention for adult patients with rectal prolapse

This review describes the pathogenesis, diagnosis, preoperative testing, and surgical decision making involved in the management of full-thickness rectal protrusion in adults. Historic and current procedures are described in detail. No one procedure is favored over others, and selection depends on the individual characteristics of the patient.

Recurrent rectal prolapse: what is the next good option?

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcome of surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse and compare it with the outcome of patients who underwent primary operation for rectal prolapse.

METHODS

All patients who underwent surgery for rectal prolapse were evaluated for age, gender, procedure, anorectal manometry and electromyography findings, and morbidity. The results for patients who underwent surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse were compared with a group of patients matched for age, gender, surgeon, and procedure who underwent primary operations for rectal prolapse.

RESULTS

A total of 115 patients underwent surgery for rectal prolapse. Twenty-seven patients, 10 initially operated on at this institution and 17 operated on elsewhere, underwent surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse. These 27 patients were compared with 27 patients with primary rectal prolapse operated on in our department. In the recurrent rectal prolapse group, prior surgery included rectopexy in 7 patients, Delorme's procedure in 7 patients, perineal rectosigmoidectomy in 7 patients, anal encirclement procedure in 4 patients, and resection rectopexy in 2 patients. Operations performed for recurrence were perineal rectosigmoidectomy in 14 patients, resection rectopexy in 8 patients, rectopexy in 2 patients, pelvic floor repair in 2 patients, and Delorme's procedure in 1 patient. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in preoperative incontinence score (recurrent rectal prolapse, 13.6 +/- 7.8 vs. rectal prolapse, 12.7 +/- 7.2; range, 0-20) or manometric or electromyography findings, and there were no significant differences in mortality (0 vs. 3.7 percent), mean hospital stay (5.4 +/- 2.5 vs. 6.9 +/- 2.8 days), anastomotic complications (anastomotic stricture (0 vs. 7.4 percent), anastomotic leak (3.7 vs. 3.7 percent) and wound infection (3.7 vs. 0 percent), postoperative incontinence score (2.8 +/- 4.8 vs. 1.5 +/- 2.7), or recurrence rate (14.8 vs. 11.1 percent) between the two groups at a mean follow-up of 23.9 (range, 6-68) and 22 (range, 5-55) months, respectively. The overall success rate for recurrent rectal prolapse was 85.2 percent.

CONCLUSION

The outcome of surgery for rectal prolapse is similar in cases of primary or recurrent prolapse. The same surgical options are valid in both scenarios.

Anorectal Disease

Most symptomatic internal hemorrhoids, grade 1 through 3, can be treated successfully with office-based procedures. Anorectal suppurative diseases must be treated surgically. Control of sepsis with subsequent fistula surgery as necessary is the goal. New nonoperative methods of anal fissure therapy are directed at reducing anal sphincter pressures. These methods have shown significant reduction in the need for sphincterotomy--a proven surgical technique with some risk of impaired continence. Surgery, using an advancement flap and partial internal sphincterotomy, remains the primary treatment for anal stenosis. Solitary rectal ulcer remains a difficult problem to manage medically and surgically. Multiple surgical techniques can effectively treat rectal prolapse. A minimal technique using Silastic wrap (Wright Medical Technologies; Arlington, TX), perineal resection (Altemeier procedure), and sigmoidectomy-rectopexy, or Ripstein suspension, has been the most favored method in selected patients.

O papel do tamanho dos poros na biocompatibilidade de duas próteses de polipropileno usadas na retopexia pré-sacra estudo experimental em cães

A sacropromonto-fixação no tratamento do prolapso retal é freqüentemente realizada através do uso de telas, suturas ou associações destas com ressecções. O objetivo deste trabalho foi comparar a reação da parede retal em contato com duas telas macroporosas de polipropileno, bem como determinar a incorporação de colágeno às telas. Dezoito cães adultos, pesando entre 10 e 15 kg, divididos em 2 grupos de 9 animais, foram submetidos à laparotomia e retopexia pré-sacra, sendo a tela fixada com pontos de fio monofilamentar de náilon 3.0. No primeiro grupo utilizou-se a tela denominada X (porosidade = 4 mm x 3 mm, espessura = 0,2 mm) e no segundo a tela de Prolene® (porosidade = 164 m x 96 m, espessura = 0,7 mm). No 30º dia de pós-operatório os animais foram sacrificados. A reação tissular foi avaliada macro e microscópicamente. Os parâmetros macroscópicos analisados foram: presença de seroma, hematoma, abscesso, fístula, estenose, aderência e não incorporação da tela. Na avaliação microscópica foram verificados: reação inflamatória, fibrose, presença de células gigantes e infiltração fibroblástica além da incorporação qualitativa e quantitativa de colágeno à tela. Verificou-se que na análise macroscópica e histológica as telas se comportaram de maneira semelhante. Já a densitometria do colágeno revelou maior incorporação de colágeno I (maduro) na tela X, não havendo diferença significante quanto ao colágeno III (imaturo). Concluiu-se não haver diferença de parâmetros macroscópicos, histopatológicos ou de incorporação de colágeno III entre as duas telas. A tela com poros maiores incorporou mais colágeno I e consequentemente mais colágeno total.

Transsacral rectopexy for recurrent complete rectal prolapse

The aim of this study was to examine the functional outcome of transsacral rectopexy performed with Dexon mesh for recurrent complete rectal prolapse. Anorectal function was assessed by anorectal manometry and defecography, before and from 1 year after surgery in five patients who were followed up for 1-3 years. The fecal incontinence score recovered from a preoperative mean score of 3.8 to a postoperative mean score of 1.2, and constipation was improved in four patients (80%). The straining anorectal angle (S-ARA), measured by defecography, improved from a preoperative value of 120.6 degrees +/- 6.9 degrees to a postoperative value of 98.5 degrees +/- 3.5 degrees (P < 0.05), and the perineal descent (PD) improved from a preoperative value of 16.2 +/- 2.5 cm to a postoperative value of 8.1 +/- 1.3 cm (P < 0.05). The maximal resting pressure (MRP) increased from a preoperative value of 20.5 +/- 3.7 cmH2O to a postoperative value of 40.5 +/- 4.8 cmH2O (P < 0.05). These findings indicate that transsacral rectopexy with Dexon mesh can achieve good control of recurrent complete rectal prolapse.

Rectal prolapse and fecal incontinence

Rectal prolapse and fecal incontinence are problems with enormous social, functional, and economic significance to hundreds of thousands of people every year. Through a knowledgeable approach and careful diagnostic studies, many people can be cured or helped.