Laparoscopic Resection Rectopexy Versus Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy for Complete Rectal Prolapse

Overview

Journal Tech Coloproctol

Date 2014 Feb 7

PMID 24500726

Citations 18

Authors

H A Formijne Jonkers

A Maya

W A Draaisma

W A Bemelman

I A Broeders

E C J Consten

S D Wexner

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic resection rectopexy (LRR) and laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) are favored for the treatment for rectal prolapse (RP) in the USA and Europe, respectively. This study aims to compare these two surgical techniques.

Methods: All patients who underwent LRR because of RP between January 2000 and January 2012 at Cleveland Clinic Florida (Weston, FL, USA) were identified, and all relevant characteristics were entered in a database. This same analysis was also conducted for all patients who underwent LVR in the Meander Medical Center (Amersfoort, the Netherlands) between January 2004 and January 2012. These two cohorts were retrospectively compared with regard to complications, functional results and recurrence.

Results: Twenty-eight patients (all female, mean age 50.1 years) were included in the LRR cohort at a mean follow-up of 57 (range 2-140; standard deviation (SD) ± 41.2) months. The LVR group consisted of 40 patients (36 females and 4 males) with a mean age of 67.0 years and a mean follow-up of 42 (range 2-82; SD ± 23.8) months. A significant reduction in constipation was observed in both cohorts after surgery: 57 versus 21% after LRR and 55 versus 23% after LVR (both P < 0.05). The incidence of incontinence also significantly decreased in both groups: 15% after LVR (55% before surgery) and 4% after LRR (61 % before surgery). Direct comparison of these two techniques showed a trend to significance (P = 0.09). Significantly, more complications occurred after LRR (n = 9: 1 major, 8 minor) then after LVR (n = 3: 2 major, 1 minor) (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Both LVR and LRR are effective for the treatment for RP. Although both techniques offer significant improvements in functional symptoms, continence may be better after LRR. However, LRR also had a higher complication rate then did LVR.

Citing Articles

Mesh Rectopexy or Resection Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse; Is There a Gold Standard Method: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.

Koimtzis G, Stefanopoulos L, Geropoulos G, Chalklin C, Karniadakis I, Alawad A J Clin Med. 2024; 13(5).

PMID: 38592257 PMC: 10933911. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13051363.

Current diagnostic tools and treatment modalities for rectal prolapse.

Oruc M, Erol T World J Clin Cases. 2023; 11(16):3680-3693.

PMID: 37383136 PMC: 10294152. DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i16.3680.

Predictive factors for functional failure of ventral mesh rectopexy in the treatment of rectal prolapse and obstructed defecation.

Solari S, Martellucci J, Ascanelli S, Sturiale A, Annicchiarico A, Fabiani B Tech Coloproctol. 2022; 26(12):973-979.

PMID: 36197564 PMC: 9637597. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-022-02708-8.

Ninety-day morbidity of robot-assisted redo surgery for recurrent rectal prolapse, mesh erosion and pelvic pain: lessons learned from 9 years' experience in a tertiary referral centre.

van der Schans E, Verheijen P, Broeders I, Consten E Colorectal Dis. 2021; 23(12):3205-3212.

PMID: 34741395 PMC: 9299011. DOI: 10.1111/codi.15979.

Anatomo-functional outcomes of the laparoscopic Frykman-Goldberg procedure for rectal prolapse in a tertiary referral centre.

Gallo G, Trompetto M, Realis Luc A, Novelli E, De Paola G, Clerico G Updates Surg. 2021; 73(5):1819-1828.

PMID: 34138448 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-021-01114-3.

References

Matzel K, Heuer S, Zhang W . [Rectal prolapse. Abdominal or local approach]. Chirurg. 2008; 79(5):444-51. DOI: 10.1007/s00104-008-1546-2. View

Ashari L, Lumley J, Stevenson A, Stitz R . Laparoscopically-assisted resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse: ten years' experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005; 48(5):982-7. DOI: 10.1007/s10350-004-0886-3. View

Draaisma W, van Eijck M, Vos J, Consten E . Lumbar discitis after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2010; 26(2):255-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-010-0971-0. View

Wijffels N, Cunningham C, Dixon A, Greenslade G, Lindsey I . Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse is safe and effective in the elderly. Does this make perineal procedures obsolete?. Colorectal Dis. 2010; 13(5):561-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02242.x. View

Wu J . Rectal prolapse: a historical perspective. Curr Probl Surg. 2009; 46(8):602-716. DOI: 10.1067/j.cpsurg.2009.03.006. View

Madiba T, Baig M, Wexner S . Surgical management of rectal prolapse. Arch Surg. 2005; 140(1):63-73. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.140.1.63. View

Senapati A, Gray R, Middleton L, Harding J, Hills R, Armitage N . PROSPER: a randomised comparison of surgical treatments for rectal prolapse. Colorectal Dis. 2013; 15(7):858-68. DOI: 10.1111/codi.12177. View

Boons P, Collinson R, Cunningham C, Lindsey I . Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse improves constipation and avoids de novo constipation. Colorectal Dis. 2009; 12(6):526-32. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.01859.x. View

Laubert T, Kleemann M, Schorcht A, Czymek R, Jungbluth T, Bader F . Laparoscopic resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a single-center study during 16 years. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24(10):2401-6. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-010-0962-9. View

10.

DHoore A, Cadoni R, Penninckx F . Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse. Br J Surg. 2004; 91(11):1500-5. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4779. View

11.

Magruder J, Efron J, Wick E, Gearhart S . Laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse to reduce surgical-site infections and length of stay. World J Surg. 2013; 37(5):1110-4. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-013-1943-7. View

12.

Laubert T, Bader F, Kleemann M, Esnaashari H, Bouchard R, Hildebrand P . Outcome analysis of elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012; 27(6):789-95. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-011-1395-1. View

13.

Kuijpers H . Treatment of complete rectal prolapse: to narrow, to wrap, to suspend, to fix, to encircle, to plicate or to resect?. World J Surg. 1992; 16(5):826-30. DOI: 10.1007/BF02066977. View

14.

DHoore A, Penninckx F . Laparoscopic ventral recto(colpo)pexy for rectal prolapse: surgical technique and outcome for 109 patients. Surg Endosc. 2006; 20(12):1919-23. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-005-0485-y. View

15.

Maggiori L, Bretagnol F, Ferron M, Panis Y . Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: a prospective long-term evaluation of functional results and quality of life. Tech Coloproctol. 2013; 17(4):431-6. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-013-0973-3. View

16.

Stevenson A, Stitz R, Lumley J . Laparoscopic-assisted resection-rectopexy for rectal prolapse: early and medium follow-up. Dis Colon Rectum. 1998; 41(1):46-54. DOI: 10.1007/BF02236895. View

17.

Formijne Jonkers H, Draaisma W, Wexner S, Broeders I, Bemelman W, Lindsey I . Evaluation and surgical treatment of rectal prolapse: an international survey. Colorectal Dis. 2012; 15(1):115-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03135.x. View

18.

Cadeddu F, Sileri P, Grande M, De Luca E, Franceschilli L, Milito G . Focus on abdominal rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse: meta-analysis of literature. Tech Coloproctol. 2011; 16(1):37-53. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-011-0798-x. View

19.

Clark 3rd C, Jupiter D, Thomas J, Papaconstantinou H . Rectal prolapse in the elderly: trends in surgical management and outcomes from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. J Am Coll Surg. 2012; 215(5):709-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.07.004. View

20.

Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P . Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004; 240(2):205-13. PMC: 1360123. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae. View