Outcomes of laparoscopic management of multicompartmental pelvic organ prolapse

Ventral Rectopexy: An International Expert Panel Consensus and Review of Contemporary Literature

BACKGROUND

Ventral rectopexy has become increasingly used in the surgical management of rectal prolapse. There is a need for a contemporary evaluation of the role of the procedure and a description of its use in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To create an international consensus on ventral rectopexy.

DESIGN

An expert panel undertook a scoping review of the literature to identify subject domains of interest. Literature reviews were completed for each domain with subsequent development of evidence-based and practice-based statements. These statements were compiled and reviewed by the group over a total of 9 meetings. Once statements were confirmed, supportive text was finalized, and an anonymous vote was completed using Research Electronic Data Capture to record consensus.

SETTING

An international expert panel comprising colorectal surgeons who perform ventral rectopexy in a high-volume center.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Statements and associated expert consensus.

RESULTS

Eleven experts identified 10 domains for review: indications, contraindications, assessment and planning, consent, operative details, prostheses, complications, follow-up, recurrence and reoperative surgery, and specific considerations. After round table review, there were 17 resultant statements for consideration. Experts agreed unanimously with 13 of the statements and their accompanying text, with different experts disagreeing regarding the remaining 4 statements (91% consensus each).

LIMITATIONS

Paucity of high-quality data.

CONCLUSIONS

This international group developed 17 statements with high consensus. These statements provide an up-to-date summary of the literature, identify key areas for research development, and provide a reference point for colon and rectal surgeons who undertake ventral rectopexy as part of their practice. See Video Abstract .

RECTOPEXIA VENTRAL CONSENSO DE UN PANEL INTERNACIONAL DE EXPERTOS Y REVISIN DE LA LITERATURA CONTEMPORNEA

ANTECEDENTES:La rectopexia ventral se ha utilizado cada vez más en el tratamiento quirúrgico del prolapso rectal. Es necesario realizar una evaluación contemporánea del rol del procedimiento y una descripción de su uso en la práctica clínica.OBJETIVO:Crear un consenso internacional sobre la rectopexia ventral.DISEÑO:Un panel de expertos realizó una revisión exhaustiva de la literatura para identificar los dominios temáticos de interés. Se completaron revisiones de la literatura para cada dominio con el desarrollo de declaraciones basadas en la evidencia y la práctica. Estas fueron compiladas y revisadas por el grupo a lo largo de un total de nueve reuniones. Una vez que se confirmaron las declaraciones, se finalizó el texto de apoyo y se completó una votación anónima utilizando REDCap para registrar el consenso.ESCENARIO:Un panel internacional de expertos compuesto por cirujanos colorrectales que realizan rectopexia ventral en un centro de alto volumen.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS:Declaraciones y consenso de expertos asociado.RESULTADOS:Once expertos identificaron diez dominios a revisar: indicaciones, contraindicaciones, evaluación y planificación, consentimiento, detalles operatorios, prótesis, complicaciones, seguimiento, recurrencia y cirugía reoperatoria y consideraciones específicas. Después de la revisión en mesa redonda, hubo 17 declaraciones resultantes para su consideración. Los expertos estuvieron de acuerdo unánimemente con trece de las declaraciones y su texto acompañante, y diferentes expertos estuvieron en desacuerdo con cuatro declaraciones (91% de consenso cada una).LIMITACIONES:Escasez de datos de alta calidad.CONCLUSIÓN:Este grupo internacional desarrolló 17 declaraciones con alto consenso. Estas declaraciones proporcionan un resumen actualizado de la literatura, identifican áreas claves para el desarrollo de la investigación y un punto de referencia para los cirujanos de colon y recto que realizan rectopexia ventral como parte de su práctica. (Traducción-Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez ).

Mesh-associated complications in minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Ventral mesh rectopexy (laparoscopic and robotic) is a common and well established treatment of rectal prolapse. Although described as safe and effective, complications, especially mesh-associated ones are often mentioned. Additionally, there is no consensus regarding the mesh type and fixation method as well as the materials used for this purpose. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the total amount of complications and of those the mesh-associated ones.

METHODS

Pubmed, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register were screened for complications in general and in detail regarding the mesh(es) and a systematic review was performed.

RESULTS

Following qualitative evaluation, 40 studies were identified for further investigation. Across 6269 patients, complications were found in 9.2% (622 patients). Mesh-related complications were described in 1.4% (88 patients) of which 64.8% were erosions, 11.4% fistulas and 13.6% mesh releases. The complication rate according to the different materials were low with 1% in biological and synthetic meshes and 1.8% in not further described or mixed mesh type. Non-absorbable material to fixate the mesh was most frequently used to fixate the mesh.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy is a safe operation with a low-complication rate, regardless of mesh type.

Long-term follow-up after laparoscopic reparation of pelvic organ prolapses in a large teaching gynecological center

OBJECTIVE

To provide a description of laparoscopic approach to correct pelvic organ prolapses and evaluate the risk factors associated with the prolapse recurrence.

STUDY DESIGN

We retrospectively analyzed 418 patients with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse who underwent a laparoscopic reparation at our university center from 2010 to 2020. Prolapses were assessed by Baden-Walker system (stage I-IV). The association between the potential prognostic factors and the recurrence was analyzed using Cox regression.

RESULTS

We included 418 patients. Most patients (97.6%) had at least one vaginal delivery and 92 (22%) had a previous prolapse surgery. In 29.74% of cases levator ani muscle avulsion was observed. We performed a cervicosacropexy in 336 (80.38%) cases, a sacrohysteropexy in 13 (3.11%), and a sacrocolpopexy in 69 (16.5%). Also, concomitantly, 66 (15.79%) patients with stress and occult urinary incontinence underwent TOT surgery. Surgical complications were low (9.51%) and the majority were minor. Median follow-up was 37 months (IQR 10.5, 61.4 months), and the global recurrence rate was 9.57%. Only 4.06% of cases required reintervention. In Cox regression analysis only levator ani muscle avulsion remained as a recurrence-associated factor.

CONCLUSION

Our series is one of the largest and with the longest follow-up. Recurrence rate was low, and comparable to other large series. The only independent factor related to recurrence was the levator ani muscle avulsion.

A quantitative study to explore functional outcomes following laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse

INTRODUCTION

Rectal prolapse is a life-altering problem and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) is emerging as the surgical intervention of choice. However, the literature is ambiguous on its effect on bowel function and sparse as regards bladder and sexual function. This study assesses short-term functional outcomes following LVMR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This quantitative retrospective study with a pretest-post-test design included 130 adults who had undergone LVMR from October 2010 to December 2018 in a tertiary centre. Analysis with paired-samples t-test and Wilcoxon matched pairs test was done using SPSS (v26).

RESULTS

The median age was 58 years (interquartile range, 48-74 years); 123 (94.6%) were female. The median length of stay was two days (interquartile range, 1-2 days). A total of 104 (80%) sets of medical notes were reviewed. One patient had recurrence of rectal prolapse. Synthetic mesh was used in 24 patients (23.1%) and biological mesh in 80 (76.9%). One patient had extrusion of a synthetic mesh and required surgery; 31(23.8%) completed the Electronic Patient Assessment Questionnaire for Pelvic Floor. Overall, the improvement in bladder function was not statistically significant (p = 0.670). A statistically significant improvement was seen for all bowel symptoms (p = 0.002) excluding constipation (p = 0.295). Irritable bowel symptoms associated with rectal prolapse improved significantly following LVMR (p = 0.001). Vaginal prolapse (p < 0.0005), dyspareunia (p = 0.001) and bowel symptoms affecting sexual intercourse (p = 0.01) improved, but improvement in overall sexual function was not statistically significant (p = 0.081).

CONCLUSIONS

LVMR improves bowel function overall, although it can worsen constipation. It has the potential to improve sexual function but makes negligible difference to bladder function.

Advantages of robotic surgery in the treatment of complex pelvic organs prolapse

Robot-assisted surgery is safe and effective to treat the complex pelvic organs prolapse (C-POP). The present study analyzes all the robotic procedures and their advantages in the treatment of C-POP performed in a Proctologic and Pelvic Floor Clinical Centre. All the patients affected by C-POP who had robot-assisted surgery were retrospective analyzed. The anatomical and functional outcomes were respectively evaluated through POP-Q grading system and Wexner score about constipation and incontinence. The satisfaction rate was investigated using a five-point scale. From September 2014 to December 2018, 229 women underwent robotic surgery. The follow-up was 12 months. There were no robot-related complications. One hematoma (4.5%) of the recto-vaginal space occurred after Robotic Ventral Rectopexy with Folded Mesh (R-VRP-FM). In the robotic assisted lateral suspension (R-ALS) group there was one case of anterior vaginal wall mesh exposure (0.9%). After the robotic ventral rectopexy (R-VRP) the recurrence rate of external rectal prolapse, internal rectal prolapse, rectocele and enterocele was respectively 6.6, 9.5, 7.4 and 9.5%. After R-VRP-FM only one cystocele (14%) and one partial rectal prolapse (25%) recurred. Vaginal bulge symptoms resolution rate was 95.4%. The mean Wexner constipation score significantly decreased after R-VRP and R-VRP-FM. Vaginal bulge symptoms improved in 98.3% of cases with any apical prolapse recurrence after robotic abdominal colposacropexy. Success rate after R-ALS was 99.1% and 96.4% for apical and anterior prolapse respectively. Robotic assistance makes some surgical steps easier and more precise and this may result in less morbidity and better results.

Impact of Suture Type on Erosion Rate After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: A Case-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

There has been increasing concern and scrutiny in the use of mesh for certain pelvic organ prolapse procedures. However, mesh erosion was often associated with sites of suture fixation of the mesh to the rectum or vagina. Thus, in response to this finding, we replaced our suture material with absorbable monofilament suture.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of mesh-related complications after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, according to the type of suture used in fixation of mesh.

DESIGN

This was retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was performed at a high-volume, tertiary care center. It was conducted using a prospective database including patients who underwent laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy over a 7-year period.

PATIENTS

A total of 495 cases were included; 296 (60%) laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexies were performed using a nonabsorbable suture compared with 199 (40%) with an absorbable suture in a case-matched analysis. In addition, 151 cases of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy with nonabsorbable were matched based on age, sex, and time of follow-up, with an equal number of patients using absorbable monofilament suture.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Primary outcome was symptomatic mesh erosion after rectopexy. Secondary outcomes included other mesh-related complications and/or reoperations.

RESULTS

The erosion rate was 2% (6/495) in the nonabsorbable suture group, including 4 erosions into the rectum and 2 into the vagina. There was no erosion in the group with absorbable suture. This difference was maintained after matching: after a median follow-up of 6 (12) months, there was no erosion in the absorbable suture group versus 3.3% erosion (n = 5) in the nonabsorbable suture group (p = 0.03).

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesh-related complications are reduced using absorbable sutures compared with nonabsorbable sutures when performing laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy with synthetic mesh without an increase in rectopexy failures. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B49. IMPACTO DEL TIPO DE SUTURA EN LA TASA DE EROSIóN DESPUéS DE LA RECTOPEXIA VENTRAL LAPAROSCóPICA CON MALLA: UN ESTUDIO DE CASOS EMPAREJADOS: Ha habido una creciente preocupación y escrutinio en el uso de la malla para ciertos procedimientos de prolapso de órganos pélvicos. Sin embargo, la erosión de la malla a menudo se asoció con sitios de fijación de sutura de la malla al recto o la vagina. Por lo tanto, en respuesta a este hallazgo, reemplazamos nuestro material de sutura con sutura de monofilamento absorbible.Comparar las tasas de complicaciones relacionadas con la malla después de la rectopexia laparoscópica de malla ventral, de acuerdo al tipo de sutura utilizada en la fijación de la malla.Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.Este estudio se realizó en un centro de atención de tercer nivel de alto volumen. Se realizó utilizando una base de datos prospectiva que incluía pacientes que se sometieron a una rectopexia de malla ventral laparoscópica durante un período de 7 años.Se incluyeron un total de 495 casos; 296 (60%) rectopexias de malla ventral laparoscópica utilizando una sutura no reabsorbible en comparación con 199 (40%) con una sutura absorbible en un análisis de casos emparejados. Además, 151 casos de rectopexia ventral laparoscópica con malla no absorbible se emparejaron según la edad, el sexo y el tiempo de seguimiento con un número igual de pacientes que usaban sutura de monofilamento absorbible.La medida de resultado primaria fue la erosión sintomática de la malla después de la rectopexia. La medida de resultado secundarias incluyeron otras complicaciones y/o reoperaciones relacionadas con la malla.La tasa de erosión fue del 2% (6/495) en el grupo de sutura no absorbible; 4 erosiones en el recto y 2 en la vagina. No hubo erosión en el grupo con sutura absorbible. Esta diferencia se mantuvo después del emparejamiento: después de una mediana de seguimiento de 6 (12) meses, no hubo erosión en el grupo de sutura absorbible versus 3.3% de erosión (n = 5) en el grupo de sutura no absorbible (p = 0.03).Este estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.Las complicaciones relacionadas con la malla se reducen utilizando suturas absorbibles en comparación con las suturas no absorbibles cuando se realiza la rectopexia de malla ventral laparoscópica con malla sintética, sin un aumento en los fracasos de rectopexia. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B49.