Strategy for selection of type of operation for rectal prolapse based on clinical criteria

Validity of task-specific metrics for assessment in perineal proctectomy

BACKGROUND

Perineal proctectomy is a complex procedure that requires advanced skills. Currently, there are no simulators for training in this procedure. As part of our objective of developing a virtual reality simulator, our goal was to develop and validate task-specific metrics for the assessment of performance for this procedure. We conducted a three-phase study to establish task-specific metrics, obtain expert consensus on the appropriateness of the developed metrics, and establish the discriminant validity of the developed metrics.

METHODS

In phase I, we utilized hierarchical task analysis to formulate the metrics. In phase II, a survey involving expert colorectal surgeons determined the significance of the developed metrics. Phase III was aimed at establishing the discriminant validity for novices (PGY1-3) and experts (PGY4-5 and faculty). They performed a perineal proctectomy on a rectal prolapse model. Video recordings were independently assessed by two raters using global ratings and task-specific metrics for the procedure. Total scores for both metrics were computed and analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test. A Mann-Whitney U test with Benjamini-Hochberg correction was used to evaluate between-group differences. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was computed to assess the correlation between global and task-specific scores.

RESULTS

In phase II, a total of 23 colorectal surgeons were recruited and consensus was obtained on all the task-specific metrics. In phase III, participants (n = 22) included novices (n = 15) and experts (n = 7). There was a strong positive correlation between the global and task-specific scores (rs = 0.86; P < 0.001). Significant between-group differences were detected for both global (χ2 = 15.38; P < 0.001; df = 2) and task-specific (χ2 = 11.38; P = 0.003; df = 2) scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a biotissue rectal prolapse model, this study documented high IRR and significant discriminant validity evidence in support of video-based assessment using task-specific metrics.

An experimental study on the pathophysiology of rectal prolapse

Objective: For decades, rectal prolapse has been hypothesized to be caused due to laxity or weakness of the pelvic floor muscles which is often sup- posed to be related to childbearing in females. However, 50% of females with rectal prolapse have been reported to be nulliparous and this hypothesis does not explain the incidence of rectal prolapse in males. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of rectal redundancy in rectal prolapse patho- physiology.

Material and Methods: Nineteen female Sprague Dawley rats (250-300 g) at 16 weeks of age were obtained from the animal center. Rats were divided into two groups as rectal mobilization (study) group (n= 9) and sham-operated control (n= 10) group. In the study group, soft dissection was applied and rectum were mobilized up from the pelvic floor to create a redundant or hypermobilized rectum.The primary outcome was the rate of rectal pro- lapse after rectal mobilization.

Results: As compared to the sham-operated control group, in which none of the rats had rectal prolapse throughout the post-surgical period, rectal prolapse was observed in four of the rats in the rectal mobilization group (0% vs. 44%; p= 0.006). Being unable to increase the length of the rectums of the rats, but using only mobilization to create the redundancy, and the lack of data regarding any adhesions after surgery are the main limitations of this study.

Conclusion: This study showed the role of rectal redundancy on the rectal prolapse pathophysiology.

Does the Length of the Prolapsed Rectum Impact Outcome of Surgical Repair?

BACKGROUND

There are many surgical options for the treatment of rectal prolapse with varying recurrence rates reported. The association between rectal prolapse length and recurrence risk has not been explored previously.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether length of prolapse predicts a risk of recurrence.

DESIGN

Consecutive patients from a prospectively collected institutional review board-approved data registry were evaluated.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at the Cleveland Clinic Department of Colorectal Surgery.

PATIENTS

All patients from 2010 to 2018 who underwent surgical intervention for rectal prolapse were included.

INTERVENTION

Perineal repair with Delorme procedure and Altemeier, as well as abdominal repair with ventral rectopexy, resection rectopexy, and posterior rectopexy, was included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prolapse length, recurrence, type of surgery, and primary or secondary procedure were measured.

RESULTS

In total, 280 patients had prolapse surgery over 8 years, mean age was 59 years (SD = 18 y), and 92.4% were female. Seventy percent had a prolapse length documented as <5 cm, and 30% had prolapse length documented as >5 cm. The mean prolapse length was 4.8 cm (SD = 2.9 cm). The overall rate of recurrent prolapse was 18%. There were 51 patients who had a recurrent prolapse after their first prolapse surgery. Factors significant for recurrence on univariate analysis were a perineal approach (p = 0.03), previous Delorme procedure (p < 0.001), and prolapse length >5 cm (p = 0.04). On multivariate analysis there was significantly increased recurrence with length of prolapse >5 cm (OR = 2.2 (95% CI, 1.1-4.4); p = 0.02) and having a previous Delorme procedure (OR = 4.0 (95% CI, 1.6-10.1); p = 0.004). For each 1-cm increase in prolapse, the odds of recurrence increased by a factor of 2.2.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective study of a heterogenous patient cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The greater the length of prolapsed rectum, the greater the risk of recurrence. The length of prolapse should be considered when planning the most appropriate surgical repair to modify the recurrence risk. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B463. EL TAMAÑO DEL RECTO PROLAPSADO AFECTA EL RESULTADO DE LA REPARACIÓN QUIRÚRGICA?: Existen muchas opciones quirúrgicas para el tratamiento del prolapso de recto con diferentes tasas de recurrencia publicadas. La asociación entre el tamaño del prolapso rectal y el riesgo de recurrencia no se han explorado previamente.Determinar si el largo en el tamaño del prolapso predice un riesgo de recidiva.Se evaluaron pacientes consecutivos de un registro de datos aprobado por el IRB recopilado prospectivamente.Departamento de cirugía colorrectal de la Clínica Cleveland, en Ohio.Todos aquellos pacientes que entre 2010 y 2018 se sometieron a una intervención quirúrgica por prolapso completo de recto.La reparación perineal incluyó los procedimientos de Altemeier y Delorme. Las reparaciones abdominales incluidas fueron la rectopexia ventral, la rectopexia con resección y la rectopexia posterior.Tamaño del prolapso, recurrencia, tipo de intervención quirúrgica y tipo de procedimiento (primario o secundario).En total, 280 pacientes se sometieron a cirugía de prolapso rectal durante 8 años, la edad media fue de 59 años (DE 18) donde el 92,4% eran mujeres. El 70% tenían un tamaño de prolapso documentado como < 5 cm y 30% tenían un tamaño de prolapso documentada como > 5 cm. La longitud media del prolapso fue de 4,8 cm (DE 2,9).La tasa general de recidiva del prolapso fue de 18%. Hubo 51 pacientes que presentaron recidiva del prolapso después de una primera cirugía. Los factores significativos para la recidiva en el análisis univariado fueron el abordaje perineal (p = 0.03), un procedimiento de Delorme previo (p <0.001) y el tamaño del prolapso > 5 cm (p = 0.04). En el análisis multivariado, hubo un aumento significativo de la recidiva en aquellos prolapsos de > 5 cm (OR 2,2; IC del 95%: 1,09-4,4; p = 0,02) con un procedimiento de Delorme previo (OR 4; IC del 95%: 1,6 a 10,1; p = 0,004). Por cada centímetro de tamaño del prolapso, las probabilidades de recidiva aumentaron en un factor de 2,2.Estudio retrospectivo de una cohorte de pacientes heterogénea.Cuanto mayor es el tamaño del recto prolapsado, mayor es el riesgo de recidiva. Se debe evaluar muy cuidadosamente el tamaño de los prolapsos para escoger la corrección quirúrgica más apropiada y así disminuir el riesgo de recidivas.Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B463. (Traducción-Dr Xavier Delgadillo).

Abdominal versus Perineal Approach for Treatment of Rectal Prolapse: Comparable Safety in a Propensity-matched Cohort

Abdominal operations for rectal prolapse are associated with lower recurrence rates than perineal procedures but presumed higher morbidity. Therefore, perineal procedures are recommended for patients deemed unfit for abdominal repair. Consequently, bias confounds retrospective comparisons of the two approaches. To clarify the impact of operative approach on outcomes, we analyzed abdominal and perineal procedures in a propensity score-matched analysis. We selected patients undergoing surgery for rectal prolapse from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set from 2005 to 2010. We grouped procedures as abdominal or perineal. We identified preoperative variables predictive of complications and regressed against operative approach. The resulting propensity score was used to select a matched cohort with similar clinical risk. We identified 2188 patients (848 abdominal [38.8%]; 1340 perineal [61.2%]). Patients undergoing the perineal approach had higher rates of most risk variables. Propensity matching resulted in 563 matched pairs (1126 patients) with similar clinical risk. In this matched cohort, no significant difference was found in the rate of any complication between the operative approaches; mortality was 0.9 per cent in each group ( P = 1.0). Relative risk for major morbidity after abdominal approach was 1.39 (95% confidence interval, 0.92 to 2.10; P = 0.15). Although many patients with rectal prolapse are high risk for abdominal surgery, our study indicates that many patients treated by perineal repair could be safely treated with a more durable operation.

Laparoscopic Suture versus Mesh Rectopexy for the Treatment of Persistent Complete Rectal Prolapse in Children: A Comparative Randomized Study

Purpose

To compare laparoscopic mesh rectopexy with laparoscopic suture rectopexy. Patients and Methods. The prospective study was conducted at Pediatric Surgery Department, Al-Azhar University Hospitals, Cairo, Egypt between Feb 2010 and Jan 2015. Seventy-eight children with persistent complete rectal prolapse were subjected to laparoscopic rectopexy. Fourteen parents refused to participate. All patients received initial conservative treatment for more than one year. The remaining 64 patients were randomized divided into two equal groups. Group A; 32 patients underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy and group B, 32 underwent laparoscopic suture rectopexy. The operative time, recurrence rate, post-operative constipation, and effect on fecal incontinence, were reported and evaluated for each group.

Results

Sixty-four cases presented with persistent complete rectal prolapse were the material of this study. They were 40 males and 24 females. Mean age at operation was 8 (5–12) years. All cases were completed laparoscopically. Mean operative time in laparoscopic suture rectopexy was shorter than laparoscopic mesh rectopexy group. No early post-operative complications were encountered. No cases of recurrence with mesh rectopexy group while in suture rectopexy group it was 4 cases (14.2%). Post-operative constipation occurred in one case (3.57%) in suture rectopexy group and occurred in one case (3.3%) in mesh rectopexy group. Fecal incontinence improved in 26/28 cases (92.8%) in suture rectopexy while in mesh rectopexy it was improved in 30/30 cases (100%) of cases.

Conclusion

Both laparoscopic mesh and suture rectopexy are feasible and reliable methods for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse in children. However, no recurrence, low incidence of constipation and high improvement of incontinence at follow up more than 36 months with mesh rectopexy accordingly, we considered mesh rectopexy to be the procedure of choice in treatment of complete rectal prolapse.

Long-term outcomes of robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for external rectal prolapse

INTRODUCTION

Nowadays in Europe, laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy is the gold standard treatment of external rectal prolapse (ERP). The benefits of robot ventral mesh rectopexy (RVMR) are not clearly defined. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the long-term results of RVMR. The secondary objective was to determine predictive factors of recurrence.

DESIGN

Monocentric, retrospective study. Data, both pre-operative and peri-operative, were collected, and follow-up data were assessed prospectively by a telephone questionnaire. The study was performed in a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

Between August 2007 and August 2017, we evaluate all consecutive patients who underwent RVMR for ERP by three different surgeons. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate perceived by patients. Secondary outcome were functional results based on Knowles-Eccersley-Scott-Symptom score for constipation and Wexner score for incontinence, compared before and after surgery.

RESULTS

During the study period 96 patients (86 women) underwent RVMR. The mean age was 62.3 years (range 16-90). Twelve patients had a history of ERP repair. Sixty-nine patients were analyzed for long-term outcomes with a mean follow-up of 37 months (range 2.3-92 months). Recurrence rate was 12.5%. After surgery, constipation was significantly reduced: 44 patients were constipated before surgery versus 23 after surgery. Six patients described de novo constipation (6.25%). Fecal incontinence was significantly reduced: 59 patients were incontinent before surgery versus 14 after surgery. No predictive factor for recurrence was identified after multivariate analysis. No mesh related complications were related.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, RVMR presents good long-term functional result and a recurrence rate similar to LVMR as published in the literature. The rate of mesh related complications seems lower.

Getting to the bottom of treatment of rectal prolapse in the elderly: Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP)

BACKGROUND

Many approaches to treat rectal prolapse exists, yet little is known regarding their safety in the elderly.

METHOD

NSQIP (2008-2014) was queried to identify patients ≥ 70 years who underwent open rectopexy (OR), laparoscopic rectopexy (LR) and perineal rectosigmoidectomy (PR). Patients were selected using NSQIP's estimated probability of morbidity of ≥50^th percentile. Outcomes were 30-day mortality and a composite: mortality, septic shock and organ space abscess and fascial dehiscence.

RESULTS

Overall, 1361 patients underwent OR(18%), LR(15%) and PR(67%) with no difference in outcomes among 3 approaches. After adjustment of other factors, the composite was associated with PR [OR 2.5, CI 1.1, 5.7] and not with older age [OR 1.3, (CI) 0.7, 2.4]. From 2008 to 2014, LR increased from 11% to 19%; and PR decreased from 75% to 72%.

CONCLUSIONS

All 3 surgical approaches carry low morbidity among the sick, elderly. PR remains the predominant approach nationally. A paradigm shift accepting the safety of abdominal approaches is needed. There should also be less focus on age in the decision-making process of surgical treatment.

Pediatric Rectal Prolapse

Rectal prolapse is a common and self-limiting condition in infancy and early childhood. Most cases respond to conservative management. Patients younger than 4 years with an associated condition have a better prognosis. Patients older than 4 years require surgery more often than younger children. Multiple operative and procedural approaches to rectal prolapse exist with variable recurrence rates and without a clearly superior operation. These include sclerotherapy, Thiersch's anal cerclage, Ekehorn's rectopexy, laparoscopic suture rectopexy, and posterior sagittal rectopexy.

A novel technique for correction of total rectal prolapse: Endoscopic-assisted percutaneous rectopexy with the aid of the EndoLifter

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Rectal prolapse is common in the elderly, having an incidence of 1% in patients over 65years of age. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a new endoluminal procedure for attaching the previously mobilized rectum to the anterior abdominal wall using an endoscopic fixation device.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study is a single-arm phasei experimental trial. Under general anesthesia, total rectal prolapse was surgically reproduced in five pigs. Transanal endoscopic reduction of the rectal prolapse was performed. The best site for transillumination of the abdominal wall, suitable for rectopexy, was identified. The EndoLifter was used to approximate the anterior wall of the proximal rectum to the anterior abdominal wall. Two percutaneous rectopexies were performed by puncture with the Loop FixtureII Gastropexy Kit^® at the preset site of transillumination. After the percutaneous rectopexies, rectoscopy and exploratory laparotomy were performed. Finally, the animals were euthanized.

RESULTS

The mean procedure time was 16min (11-21) and the mean length of the mobilized specimen was 4.32cm (range 2.9-5.65cm). A total of 10 fixations were performed with a technical success rate of 100%. There was no evidence of postoperative rectal prolapse in any of the animals. The EndoLifter facilitated the process by allowing the mucosa to be held and manipulated during the repair.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic-assisted percutaneous rectopexy is a safe and feasible endoluminal procedure for fixation of the rectum to the anterior abdominal wall in experimental animals.

Delorme's operation plus sphincteroplasty for complete rectal prolapse associated with traumatic fecal incontinence

Rectal prolapse associated with traumatic fecal incontinence is a rare clinical combination. This study was designed to assess Delorme's operation with sphincteroplasty as a surgical management of this combination in terms of recurrence and improvement of fecal incontinence. In this prospective study, we enrolled patients suffering from short, full-thickness rectal prolapse associated with traumatic fecal incontinence who had been admitted to Alexandria Main University Hospital during the period of May 2010–January 2013. Preoperative data including cause of trauma, duration of symptoms, results of anal manometry, and degree of fecal incontinence using Wexner score were collected from all patients. Delorme's procedure with overlap sphincteroplasty was done in all patients. Recurrence of prolapse and improvement of fecal incontinence were assessed after 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. The study included 13 patients aged (32±8.7) years, 9 females and 4 males. Cause of sphincteric injury included previous anal surgery in 7 patients and normal labor in 6 patients. Duration between sphincteric injury and operation was (8.08±2.47) months. Preoperative Wexner's mean score was 16.07±3.4. Early postoperative complications included superficial wound infection (69.2%), minor wound dehiscence (61.5%), and postoperative bleeding (7.6%). Recurrence was detected in 1 patient at 6 month follow-up. Wexner's score showed significant improvement for all patients after 6 months (4.00±2.04). In conclusion, combination of Delorme's procedure and sphincteroplasty for treatment of patients with short complete rectal prolapse associated with traumatic fecal incontinence is a safe, effective surgical management with satisfactory results regarding anatomical and functional outcomes.

Is robotic ventral mesh rectopexy better than laparoscopy in the treatment of rectal prolapse and obstructed defecation? A meta-analysis

Ventral mesh rectopexy is an approach in the treatment of internal and external rectal prolapse and rectocele. Our aim was to assess whether robotic surgery confers any significant advantages over laparoscopy, and the associated complication rate. Two reviewers performed a literature search using MEDLINE and PubMed databases for studies comparing robotic versus laparoscopic surgery. Five prospective, non-randomised studies were identified and included. A total of 244 patients (101 robotic and 143 laparoscopic) were included in the analysis. Operative time was shorter with laparoscopic surgery, mean weighted difference 27.94 [confidence interval (CI) 19.30-36.57; p < 0.00001]. The conversion rate was not significantly different between groups. There was a trend towards a reduction in length of inpatient stay and early post-operative complications in the robotic group; however, these did not reach statistical significance. Recurrence rates were similar between groups (odds ratio 0.91, CI 0.32-2.63; p = 0.87). Functional results were comparable between groups. Early studies show that robotic ventral rectopexy is a safe option compared to the laparoscopic approach, with overall comparable results. There appeared to be a trend towards a reduction in length of inpatient stay and post-operative complications. These perceived benefits may offset the longer operative times and outlay costs. Larger randomised controlled trials are needed to further evaluate clinical value and cost-effectiveness.

The role of synthetic and biologic materials in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse

Pelvic organ prolapse is a significant medical problem that poses a diagnostic and management dilemma. These diseases cause serious morbidity in those affected and treatment is sought for relief of pelvic pain, rectal bleeding, chronic constipation, obstructed defecation, and fecal incontinence. Numerous procedures have been proposed to treat these conditions; however, the search continues as colorectal surgeons attempt to find the procedure that would optimally treat these conditions. The use of prosthetics in the repair of pelvic organ prolapse has become prevalent as the benefits of their use are realized. While advances in biologic mesh and new surgical techniques promise improved functional outcomes with decreased complication rates without de novo symptoms, the debate concerning the best prosthetic material, synthetic or biologic, remains controversial. Furthermore, laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy has emerged as a procedure that could potentially fill this role and is rapidly becoming the procedure of choice for the surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse.

Clinical outcomes of perineal proctectomy among patients of advanced age

BACKGROUND

Rectal prolapse occurs primarily in older patients who often have significant comorbidities. With the aging population, increasing numbers of elderly patients are presenting with rectal prolapse. The perineal approach is preferred for these patients because it involves less perioperative risk than an abdominal procedure, but the outcomes of this procedure in elderly patients are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to examine whether clinical outcomes after perineal proctectomy are similar among elderly patients versus patients of younger age.

DESIGN

This study was a retrospective review.

SETTING

This study was conducted in mixed academic and private practice; the operations were performed at 16 hospitals.

PATIENTS

Patients who had perineal proctectomy for rectal prolapse from 1994 to 2012 were grouped according to age: <70 (group A), 70 to 79 (group B), 80 to 89 (group C), and ≥90 years (group D).

INTERVENTIONS

Perineal proctectomy with or without concurrent levatorplasty was performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were postoperative complications, recurrence, and survival after perineal proctectomy.

RESULTS

Four hundred patients underwent 518 perineal proctectomies: group A, N = 113; group B, N = 113; group C, N = 208; and group D, N = 84. The immediate and late complication rates were 5.6% and 3.5% and did not vary by age. Recurrence was 22.6% and was significantly different between groups, with the lowest recurrence in group D, 14.3% (p = 0.007). Reoperation after recurrence was less likely in group D. The main type of reoperation was perineal proctectomy (41.5%), but, for group D, recurrence was usually managed nonoperatively (58.3%). Median survival after operation was more than 4 years in the advanced age group.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective data, which did not allow analysis of patients with rectal prolapse who did not undergo surgery, were used in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

When selected appropriately, patients 90 years of age or older have outcomes similar to younger patients; therefore, age alone should not be a contraindication to surgery. In addition, elderly patients have a median survival of more than 4 years after surgery, so the operative risk can be worth the benefit accrued.

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

Purpose

Selecting 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.

Methods

A 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.

Results

The 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.

Conclusion

The 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.

Laparoscopy for pelvic floor disorders

Surgical treatment of pelvic floor disorders has significantly evolved during the last decade, with increasing understanding of anatomy, pathophysiology and the minimally-invasive 'revolution' of laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic pelvic floor repair requires a thorough knowledge of pelvic floor anatomy and its supportive components before repair of defective anatomy is possible. Several surgical procedures have been introduced and applied to treat rectal prolapse syndromes. Transabdominal procedures include a variety of rectopexies with the use of sutures or prosthesis and with or without resection of redundant sigmoid colon. Unfortunately there is lack of one generally accepted standard treatment technique. This article will focus on recent advances in the management of pelvic floor disorders affecting defecation, with a brief overview of contemporary concepts in pelvic floor anatomy and different laparoscopic treatment options.

Rectal prolapse and intussusception

Rectal prolapse continues to be problematic for both patients and surgeons alike, in part because of increased recurrence rates despite several well-described operations. Patients should be aware that although the prolapse will resolve with operative therapy, functional results may continue to be problematic. This article describes the recommended evaluation, role of adjunctive testing, and outcomes associated with both perineal and abdominal approaches.

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.

Comparison of perineal operations with abdominal operations for full-thickness rectal prolapse

BACKGROUND

We can divide surgery for rectal prolapse into two broad categories: abdominal and perineal. However, few studies compare the long-term outcomes and quality of life among operations for full-thickness rectal prolapse. The purpose of this study was to compare abdominal (AO) versus perineal (PO) procedures for the treatment of full-thickness rectal prolapse regarding recurrence rate, incontinence, constipation, and quality of life.

METHODS

Records of 177 operations from 1995 to 2001 were reviewed retrospectively. A telephone survey was attempted for all. Seventy-five (42%) responded to the Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS), KESS Constipation Score (KESS-CS), and SF-36 Quality of Life Score. Appropriate statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

For the 122 AO and 55 PO, there were no deaths. Mean follow-up was similar (PO 3.1 vs. AO 3.9 years; P = 0.306). As expected the PO patients were older (mean 69 vs. 55 years) and had higher ASA scores. Those undergoing PO had less procedural blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, and dietary restriction. The PO group also scored worse on the physical component of SF-36 (PO 33 vs. AO 39.6; P = 0.034). However, the rate of recurrent prolapse was significantly higher for the PO (PO 26.5% vs. AO 5.2%; P < 0.001). Complications, CCIS, KESS-CS, and SF-36 mental component were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In full-thickness rectal prolapse, elderly, sick patients are selected for a perineal operation. The morbidity, functional outcomes, and quality of life are acceptable. However, the high recurrence rates make the perineal operation a second-best choice for younger, healthy patients.

Abdominal approaches for rectal prolapse

The management of full-thickness rectal prolapse involves surgical intervention in the majority of cases. Many procedures have been described employing both perineal and abdominal approaches. Abdominal procedures result in more durable repair of the prolapse; however, the procedures require general anesthesia and are reserved for younger healthier patients. Laparoscopy has been utilized in the treatment of rectal prolapse since its introduction for colorectal procedures; recent studies have found equivalent long-term results and short-term outcomes.

Multimedia manuscript. Laparoscopic rectopexy with posterior mesh fixation

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this multimedia article is to present a technique of laparoscopic rectopexy with fixation of the rectum to the sacrum using a short strip of mesh.

METHODS

The technique is presented in a video clip.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic rectopexy procedure is usually performed using four ports. First, the upper rectum is mobilized on its right side, and dissection posterior to the rectum is performed all the way down to the level of the pelvic floor. Anterior mobilization is performed next, and the rectovaginal septum is dissected all the way down to the level of the pelvic floor. A short strip of mesh, approximately 5 cm × 2 cm in diameter, is introduced through the right lower quadrant port. The mesh is placed vertically on the sacrum from the level of the sacral promontory downward, and secured to the sacrum using endo-tackers, which should be applied below the promontory and adjacent to the midline to avoid injury to the hypogastric nerves. The mesorectum is then secured to the mesh in four points using absorbable sutures. Applying adequate sutures directly to the presacral fascia using the relatively small needles that can go through the ports may be a difficult task. Suturing to the mesh, however, is very easy, and in our opinion may be considered the main advantage of the posterior mesh technique. Ten female patients (age range, 26-84 years) underwent rectopexy using this technique. At a mean follow-up of 2.2 years, two had recurrent prolapse-one of which, the only patient in whom absorbable tackers were used-had in-house recurrence and refixation. Complications included one patient with mild pelvic pain, which spontaneously resolved in 3 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The presented technique may ease fixation of the rectum to the sacrum and potentially improve results.

A new technique for suture rectopexy without resection for rectal prolapse

BACKGROUND

We surmised that if rectopexy was performed without dissection of the lateral rectal stalks in patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse and normal preoperative transit, sigmoid resection may not be required. This study evaluated a new approach to abdominal suture rectopexy for rectal prolapse.

METHODS

A total of 81 patients (57 male, 24 female; median age 37 years, range 5-82 years) with rectal prolapse were assessed by clinical examination, anal manometry (maximum resting pressure, MRP, and squeeze pressure, MSP) and radioopaque marker transit studies. Of the 81 patients, 70 with normal preoperative transit underwent suture fixation alone, without resection, performed under spinal anaesthesia, through a 7-cm transverse left lower quadrant incision gaining access to the presacral space via a left pararectal "window", preserving the lateral stalks.

RESULTS

Average surgical time was 50 min, mortality was zero, and morbidity was 9% (three patients with wound infection, four with urinary retention). Anal incontinence improved in 43 of 53 patients (81%, p=0.001). MRP and MSP had improved at 3 months after surgery: MRP from a mean of 27.6+/-1.4 mmHg (range 2-30 mmHg) before surgery to 32.5+/-2.21 mmHg (2-60 mmHg) after surgery (p=0.008); MSP from 69.25+/-6.4 mmHg (8-153 mmHg) before surgery to 79+/-4.77 mmHg (35-157 mmHg) after surgery (p=0.001).. Transit was unchanged in 18 of 20 patients (90%) who were evaluated before and after surgery; none was constipated after surgery. At 56 months, prolapse had recurred in five patients (7%).

CONCLUSION

Abdominal suture rectopexy with a left pararectal approach without sigmoid resection in those with normal preoperative transit resulted in an improvement in anal incontinence and satisfactory long-term control of prolapse. The operation did not alter transit and did not result in significant constipation.

Recurrence and quality of life following perineal proctectomy for rectal prolapse

BACKGROUND

Surgical outcome and quality of life (QOL) following perineal proctectomy for rectal prolapse remain poorly documented.

METHODS

From 1994 to 2004, patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse were treated exclusively with perineal proctectomy independent of age or comorbidities. Subjective patient assessments and recurrences were determined retrospectively from hospital and clinic records. Consenting patients completed the gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI).

RESULTS

Perineal proctectomy was performed in 103 consecutive patients with a median age of 75 years (range 30-94). Most patients underwent concurrent levatorplasty (anterior 85.8%, posterior 67.9%). Durable results were obtained in all patients; the recurrence rate was 8.5% over a mean follow-up of 36 months. Preoperatively, 75.5% of patients reported fecal incontinence, and 32.1% had obstructed defecation. Incontinence significantly improved post-proctectomy (41.5%, p < 0.001), as did constipation (10.4%, p < 0.001). GIQLI respondents reported satisfaction following proctectomy with 63% scoring within one standard deviation of healthy controls. Patients with recurrent prolapse reported a lower QOL. Risk factors for recurrence included duration of prolapse, need for posterior levatorplasty, and prior anorectal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Perineal proctectomy provides significant relief from fecal incontinence and obstructive symptoms caused by rectal prolapse, with an acceptable recurrence rate and low morbidity.

Laparoscopic ventral recto(colpo)pexy for rectal prolapse: surgical technique and outcome for 109 patients

The authors propose a new laparoscopic technique for correction of rectal prolapse. The unique feature of this technique is that it avoids any posterolateral dissection of the rectum. The mesh is sutured to the anterior aspect of the rectum to inhibit intussusception. The technique was applied in 109 consecutive patients to correct total rectal prolapse. Conversion was needed for four patients. No postoperative mortality or major morbidity occurred. Minor morbidity was noted for 7% of the patients, and a recurrence rate of 3.66% was observed. Because this technique limited the dissection and the subsequent risk of autonomic nerve damage, a cure comparable with that resulting from classical mesh rectopexy can be anticipated.

Treatment of rectal prolapse in children with cow milk injection sclerotherapy: 30-year experience

AIM: To evaluate the role and our experience of injection sclerotherapy with cow milk in the treatment of rectal prolapse in children.

METHODS: In the last 30 years (1976-2006) we made 100 injections of sclerotherapy with cow milk in 86 children. In this study we included children who failed to respond to conservative treatment and we perform operative treatment.

RESULTS: In our study we included 86 children and in all of the patients we perform cow milk injection sclerotherapy. In 95.3% (82 children) of patients sclerotherapy was successful. In 4 (4.7%) patients we had recurrent rectal prolapse where we performed operative treatment. Below 4 years we had 62 children (72%) and 24 older children (28%). In children who needed operative treatment we performed Thiersch operation and without any complications.

CONCLUSION: Injection sclerotherapy with cow milk for treatment rectal prolapse in children is a simple and effective treatment for rectal prolapse with minimal complications.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic rectovaginopexy for rectal prolapse: a prospective cohort study on feasibility and safety

Robotic systems may be particularly supportive for procedures requiring careful pelvic dissection and suturing in the Douglas pouch, as in surgery for rectal prolapse. Studies reporting robot-assisted laparoscopic rectovaginopexy for rectal prolapse, however, are scarce. This prospective cohort study evaluated the outcome of this technique up to one year after surgery. From January 2005 to June 2006, 15 consecutive patients with a rectal prolapse, either with or without a concomitant rectocele or enterocele, underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic rectovaginopexy with support of the da Vinci robotic system. A prospective cohort study was performed on operating times, blood loss, intra-operative and post-operative complications, and outcome at a minimum of one year after surgery. Median age at time of operation was 62 years (33-72) and median body mass index 24.9 (20.9-33.9). Median robot set-up time was 10 min (3-15) and median skin-to-skin operating time was 160 min (120-180). No conversions to open surgery were necessary. No in-hospital complications occurred and there was no mortality. Median hospital stay was four days (2-9). During one year follow-up, two patients needed surgical reintervention. One patient was operated for recurrent enterocele and rectocele one week after surgery. In another patient an incisional hernia at the camera port occurred three months after surgery. At one year after surgery, 87% of patients claimed to be satisfied with their postoperative result. Robot-assisted laparoscopic rectovaginopexy proved to be an effective technique with favourable outcomes in most patients in this prospective series. The operating team experienced the support of the robotic system as beneficial, especially during the dissection of the rectovaginal plane and suturing in the Douglas pouch.

Preoperative anal manometry predicts continence after perineal proctectomy for rectal prolapse

PURPOSE

This study examines whether preoperative anal manometry and pudendal nerve terminal motor latency predict functional outcome after perineal proctectomy for rectal prolapse.

METHODS

All adult patients treated by perineal proctectomy for rectal prolapse from 1995 to 2004 were identified (N = 106). Forty-five patients underwent anal manometry and pudendal nerve terminal motor latency testing before proctectomy and they form the basis for this study.

RESULTS

Perineal proctectomy with levatoroplasty (anterior 88.9 percent; posterior 75.6 percent) was performed in all patients, with a mean resection length of 10.4 cm. Four patients (8.9 percent) developed recurrent prolapse during a 44-month mean follow-up. Preoperative resting and maximal squeeze pressures were 34.2 +/- 18.3 and 60.4 +/- 30.5 mmHg, respectively. Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency testing was prolonged or undetectable in 55.6 percent of patients. Grade 2 or 3 fecal incontinence was reported by 77.8 percent of patients before surgery, and one-third had obstructed defecation. The overall prevalence of incontinence (77.8 vs. 35.6 percent, P < 0.0001) and constipation (33.3 vs. 6.7 percent, P = 0.003) decreased significantly after proctectomy. Patients with preoperative squeeze pressures >60 mmHg (n = 19) had improved postoperative fecal continence relative to those with lower pressures (incontinence rate, 10 vs. 54 percent; P = 0.004), despite having similar degrees of preoperative incontinence. Abnormalities of pudendal nerve function and mean resting pressures were not predictive of postoperative incontinence.

CONCLUSIONS

Perineal proctectomy provides relief from rectal prolapse, with good intermediate term results. Preoperative anal manometry can predict fecal continence rates after proctectomy, because patients with maximal squeeze pressures >60 mmHg have significantly improved outcomes.

Laparoscopic suture rectopexy in the treatment of persisting rectal prolapse in children

BACKGROUND

The repair of choice for persistent rectal prolapse (PRP) in children is disputed. Laparoscopic suture rectopexy (LSRP) is effective in adults, but its usefulness in pediatric PRP is unknown. We compared LSRP with posterosagittal rectopexy (PSRP).

METHODS

Sixteen children, with a median age of 6.5 years (range, 0.8-16.8) and duration of symptoms of 2.8 years (range, 0.5-10.2), underwent surgery for PRP. Eight (1991-2000) had PSRP, and eight (2002-2005) had LSRP. Three patients with LSRP were healthy; the others had mental retardation and epilepsy (n = 1), cerebral palsy (n = 1), Aspeger's syndrome (n = 1), meningomyelocele (n = 1), and bladder extrophy (n = 1). Preoperative cologram (n = 6), sigmoideoscopy (n = 3), and anorectal manometry (n = 2) were normal in patients with LSRP. In LSRP, the rectum was mobilized and sutured to the sacral periosteum.

RESULTS

Median operation time for LSRP was 80 min (range, 62-90) and for PSRP 40 min (range, 25-70) (p < 0.05); median hospital time was 6 days (range, 3-8) for LSRP and 6 days (range, 3-9) for PSRP (not significant). Six patients with LSRP had a median follow-up of 13 months (range, 4-24). None have had recurrences, and two patients (33%) require laxatives. Of the patients with PSRP, two (25%) had recurrence and underwent abdominal rectopexy with sigmoid resection.

CONCLUSION

Medium-term results indicate that LSPR is effective in pediatric PRP. Constipation is the only postoperative problem in a significant proportion of patients.

Rectal procidentia: diagnosis and management

Rectal prolapse or procidentia is a common condition with detrimental effects on continence and social function. One of the most devastating complications for patients suffering from this disorder is fecal incontinence. The psychologic trauma these patients experience can be debilitating. This article provides an overview of rectal procidentia, including a review of the symptomatic presentation, etiology, classification, diagnosis, and treatment.

Prospective study of the effect of rectopexy on colonic motility in patients with rectal prolapse

BACKGROUND

Patients with rectal prolapse have abnormal hindgut motility. This study examined the effect of rectal prolapse surgery on colonic motility.

METHODS

Twelve patients undergoing sutured rectopexy were studied before and 6 months after surgery by colonic manometry, colonic transit study and clinical assessment of bowel function. The results were compared with those from seven control subjects.

RESULTS

Before surgery colonic pressure was greater in patients than controls (P < 0.050). Controls responded to a meal stimulus by increasing colonic pressure; this increase was absent in patients. After rectopexy, colonic pressure reduced towards control values and patients' colonic pressure response to a meal returned. High-amplitude propagated contractions (HAPCs) were seen in all controls but in only three patients before and two patients after surgery. Three patients had prolonged colonic transit before and eight after rectopexy.

CONCLUSION

Patients with rectal prolapse have abnormal colonic motility associated with reduced HAPC activity. Rectopexy reduces colonic pressure but fails to restore HAPCs, reduce constipation or improve colonic transit. These observations help explain the pathophysiology of constipation associated with rectal prolapse.