Laparoscopic or transanal repair of rectocele? Comparison of a reduction in rectocele size.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the reduction in rectocele size after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) with that after transanal repair (TAR). METHODS: Forty-six patients with rectocele who underwent LVR and 45 patients with rectocele who received TAR between February 2012 and December 2022 were included. This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. All patients had clinical evidence of a symptomatic rectocele. Bowel function was evaluated using the constipation scoring system (CSS) and fecal incontinence severity index (FISI). Substantial symptom improvement was defined as at least a 50% reduction in the CSS or FISI scores. Evacuation proctography was performed before surgery and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Constipation was substantially improved in 40-70% of the LVR patients and 70-90% of the TAR patients over 5 years. Fecal incontinence was markedly improved in 60-90% of the LVR patients across 5 years and in 75% of the TAR patients at 1 year. Postoperative proctography showed a reduction in rectocele size in the LVR patients (30 [20-59] mm preoperatively vs. 11 [0-44] mm postoperatively, P < 0.0001) and TAR patients (33 [20-55] mm preoperatively vs. 8 [0-27] mm postoperatively, P < 0.0001). The reduction rate of rectocele size in the LVR patients was significantly lower than that in the TAR patients (63 [3-100] % vs. 79 [45-100] %, P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: The reduction in rectocele size was lower in the patients who underwent LVR than in those who received TAR.

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy vs. transperineal mesh repair for obstructed defecation syndrome associated with rectocele: comparison of selectively distributed patients.

PURPOSE: Obstructed defecation syndrome represents 50-60% of patients with symptoms of constipation. We aimed to compare the two frequently performed surgical methods, laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy and transperineal mesh repair, for this condition in terms of functional and surgical outcomes. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of 131 female patients who were diagnosed with obstructed defecation syndrome, attributed to rectocele with or without rectal intussusception, enterocele, hysterocele or cystocele, and who underwent either laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy or transperineal mesh repair. Patients were evaluated for surgical outcomes based on the operative time, the length of hospital stay, operative complications, using prospectively designed charts. Functional outcome was assessed by using the Initial Measurement of Patient-Reported Pelvic Floor Complaints Tool. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients diagnosed with complex rectocele underwent laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy, and 80 patients diagnosed with simple rectocele underwent transperineal mesh repair. Mean age was found to be 50.35 ± 13.51 years, and mean parity 2.14 ± 1.47. Obstructed defecation symptoms significantly improved in both study groups, as measured by the Colorectal Anal Distress Inventory, Constipation Severity Instrument and Patient Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms scores. Minor postoperative complications including wound dehiscence (n = 3) and wound infection (n = 2) occurred in the transperineal mesh repair group. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy and transperineal mesh repair are efficient and comparable techniques in terms of improvement in constipation symptoms related to obstructed defecation syndrome. A selective distribution of patients with or without multicompartmental prolapse to one of the treatment arms might be the preferred strategy.

Preoperative predictors of success after transvaginal rectocoele repair.

PURPOSE: Determine predictors of success for transvaginal rectocoele repair (TVRR). Primary aim is to establish predictors of successful treatment analysing patients' characteristics, baseline symptoms, pelvic floor test results and pre-operative conservative treatment. METHODS: Retrospective single institution study in a tertiary referral centre for pelvic floor disorders. 207 patients underwent TVRR for symptomatic rectocoele. Information about symptoms related to obstructive defaecation, anal incontinence and vaginal prolapse, results of pelvic floor investigations, multimodality conservative management and variation in surgical technique have been recorded. Symptom related information have been collected at surgical follow-up. RESULTS: 115 patients had residual symptoms after surgical repair of rectocoele, while 97 were symptoms free. Factors associated with residual symptoms after surgical repair are previous proctological procedures, urge AI symptoms, absence of vaginal bulge symptoms, use of transanal irrigation and having a concomitant enterocoele repair during procedure. CONCLUSION: Factors able to predict a less favourable outcome after TVRR in patients with concomitant ODS are previous proctological procedures, presence of urge AI, short anal canal length on anorectal physiology, seepage on defaecating proctography, use of transanal irrigation, absence of vaginal bulge symptoms and enterocoele repair during surgery. These information are important for a tailored decision making process and to manage patients' expectations before surgical repair.

Rectocele: victim of availability bias? Results of a Belgian survey of colorectal and gynecological surgeons.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Women with a symptomatic rectocele may undergo different trajectories depending on the specialty consulted. This survey aims to evaluate potential differences between colorectal surgeons and gynecologists concerning the management of a rectocele. METHODS: A web-based survey was sent to abdominal surgeons (CS group) and gynecologists (G group) asking about their perceived definition, diagnostic workup, multidisciplinary discussion (MDT) and surgical treatment of rectoceles. The answers of both groups were analyzed with the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test at p < 0.050. RESULTS: A rectocele was defined as a prolapse of the posterior vaginal wall by 78% of the G and 41% of the CS group. All gynecologists and 49% of the CS group evaluated a rectocele clinically in dorsal decubitus, with 91% of gynecologists using a speculum and 65% using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse-Quantification (POP-Q) scoring system, compared to < 1/3 of colorectal surgeons. A digital rectal examination was performed by 90% of the CS group and 57% of the G group. A transvaginal ultrasound was only used by the G group, while anal manometry was opted for by the CS group (65%) and minimally by the G group (14%). In the G group, a posterior repair was the preferred surgical technique (78%), whereas 63% of the CS group preferred a rectopexy. Multidisciplinary discussions (MDT) were mostly organized ad hoc. CONCLUSIONS: An availability bias is seen in different aspects of rectocele evaluation and treatment. Colorectal surgeons and gynecologists are acting based on their training and experience. Motivation for pelvic floor MDT starts with creating awareness of the availability bias.

Time trend in the surgical management of obstructed defecation syndrome: a multicenter experience on behalf of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR).

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) is challenging, with several surgical options showing inconsistent functional results over time. The aim of this study was to evaluate the trend in surgical management of ODS in a 10-year timeframe across Italian referral centers. METHODS: Surgeons from referral centers for the management of pelvic floor disorders and affiliated to the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery provided data on the yearly volume of procedures for ODS from 2010 to 2019. Six common clinical scenarios of ODS were captured, including details on patient's anal sphincter function and presence of rectocele and/or rectal intussusception. Perineal repair, ventral rectopexy (VRP), transanal repair (internal Delorme), stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR), Contour Transtar, and transvaginal repair were considered in each clinical scenario. RESULTS: Twenty-five centers were included providing data on 2943 surgical patients. Procedure volumes ranged from 10-20 (54%) to 21-50 (46%) per year across centers. The most performed techniques in patients with good sphincter function were transanal repair for isolated rectocele (243/716 [34%]), transanal repair for isolated rectal intussusception (287/677 [42%]) and VRP for combined abnormalities (464/976 [48%]). When considering poor sphincter function, these were perineal repair (112/194 [57.8%]) for isolated rectocele, and VRP for the other two scenarios (60/120 [50%] and 97/260 [37%], respectively). The use of STARR and Contour Transtar decreased over time in patients with impaired sphincter function. CONCLUSIONS: The complexity of ODS treatment is confirmed by the variety of clinical scenarios that can occur and by the changing trend of surgical management over the last 10 years.

Horizontal versus vertical plication of the rectovaginal septum in transperineal repair of anterior rectocele: a pilot randomized clinical trial.

AIM: Anterior rectocele is usually an asymptomatic condition in many women, yet it can be associated with obstructed defaecation syndrome (ODS). Transperineal repair of rectocele (TPR) has been followed by variable rates of improvement in ODS. The present pilot randomized clinical trial aimed to evaluate the outcome of TPR with vertical plication (VP) of the rectovaginal septum compared to horizontal plication (HP). METHODS: Adult women with anterior rectocele were recruited to the study and were randomly allocated to one of two equal groups. The first group underwent TPR with VP of the rectovaginal septum and the second group underwent TPR with HP. The main outcome measures were improvement in ODS, recurrence of rectocele, complications and dyspareunia. RESULTS: The trial included 40 female patients with anterior rectocele. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the postoperative Wexner score. Complete cure and significant improvement in ODS symptoms were comparable after the two techniques. The reduction in rectocele size after HP was significantly greater than after VP (1.7 vs. 2.6, P < 0.0001). Significant improvement in dyspareunia was recorded after HP (P = 0.001) but not after VP (P = 0.1). There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to operating time, complications and recurrence. CONCLUSION: VP and HP of the rectovaginal septum in TPR were associated with a comparable improvement in ODS symptoms and similar complication rates. HP was followed by a greater reduction in the rectocele size and greater improvement in dyspareunia than VP.

Three years prospective clinical and radiologic follow-up of laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy.

BACKGROUND: When Rectocele is part of a complex pelvic organ prolapse, a full repair is recommended. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological results after laparoscopic surgery in patients with symptomatic rectocele and III/IV stage vaginal vault prolapse METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of women with symptomatic rectoceles and middle compartment prolapse operated on between 2013 and 2015, who underwent a laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy with synthetic Y mesh attached to puborectalis muscles, the anterior and posterior vagina wall and the sacrum. The clinical outcomes measured were symptoms of prolapse, obstructive defecation syndrome and quality of life. Radiological outcomes were distance of the vaginal vault below pubococcigeal line and depth of rectovaginal wall protrusion in dynamic pelvic resonance. RESULTS: 33 patients were included. 32 of them remained asymptomatic after a three years follow-up. Significant differences were shown in the obstructed defecation score and quality of life after 6, 12 and 36 months compared to preoperatively. No differences were identified when the postoperative results were compared. Significant differences were shown in preoperative vaginal vault prolapse (3.2 cms ± 0.8 SD below the pubococcigeal Line) and rectocele size, compared with 1 and 3 years after surgery. There were no significant differences in vaginal vault prolapse when compared after 1 and 3 years. When rectocele size after 1 and 3 years was compared, significant differences were shown, but only one clinical recurrence (3%) was identified after a mean follow-up of 47 months. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic sacrocolpoperineopexy in patients with symptomatic rectocele and III/IV vaginal vault prolapse solves the constipation and obstructed defecation with an excellent quality of life and low clinical recurrences. Radiological deterioration, especially in rectocele size, was identified in the mid-term follow-up without clinical significance.

Does Rectocele Repair Combined with Other Perineal Surgeries Affect Outcome Compared to Solo Rectocele Repair?

OBJECTIVES: Rectocele is common in female patients. To date, there is no literature comparing outcomes of rectocele repairs in combination with other perineal surgeries. We aim to analyze perioperative morbidity and mortality as well as long-term outcome of rectocele repair in combination with other perineal surgeries (RR combination) and compare this with solo rectocele repair (solo RR). DESIGN: The type of study was case-control. Data of patients who received solo rectocele repair or rectocele repair in combination with other perineal surgeries between January 2011 and December 2015 were identified and reviewed in a prospectively maintained and IRB-approved database. Ninety-eight patients were included, including 41 patients in the solo RR group and 57 patients in the RR combination group. The demographics, characteristics of patients, short-term complications, long-term complications, and morbidity of the 2 groups were observed. METHODS: The demographics, characteristics of patients, short-term complications, long-term complications, and morbidity of the 2 groups were compared, respectively. Covariate adjustment was analyzed by multivariate logistic and Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients with a median age of 57 were included, involving 41 patients in the solo RR group and 57 patients in the RR combination group. Other than the operative approach (p < 0.01), demographics and preoperative characteristics of the 2 groups were comparable. All variables, including length of stay, estimated blood loss, self-limiting rectal bleeding, transfusion, urinary retention, rectal stricture, rectal and perineal infection, rectovaginal abscess, reoperation, effective resolution of obstructive defecation symptoms, residual symptoms rate, and recurrence rate, were comparable among the 2 groups except for operative time (p = 0.03). LIMITATIONS: This study is a single-center study, which may cause bias. In addition, the sample size is limited. Staging of rectocele and routine imaging studies were not performed. CONCLUSIONS: Rectocele repair in combination with other perineal surgeries is feasible, and outcomes are comparable with solo rectocele repair. Transanal versus transvaginal repairs appear to have no influence on outcomes.

Transvaginal peritoneocele repair with anterior levatorplasty for patients with a rectocele and an enterocele.

Enteroceles and rectoceles are often identified as the cause of a vaginal mass and pelvic discomfort. The combination of a rectocele and an enterocele as pelvic organ prolapses is not infrequent; however, there are few reports on possible simultaneous treatments of these two conditions. We report a new and simple procedure for repairing an enterocele during a transvaginal anterior levatorplasty with posterior colporrhaphy for a rectocele repair. This technique involves making an excision in the peritoneal sac, with high ligation, and attaching the uterine cervix and/or cardinal ligament to the upper most part of the approximation of the levator muscles, to reinforce and lift the deep peritoneal sac. This procedure allows for transvaginal repair of both an enterocele and a rectocele. The enterocele is visualized by applying barium to the posterior vaginal wall during defecography.

A step-by-step approach to endorectal proctopexy (ERPP): how we do it.

There are many surgical treatments aimed at correcting internal mucosal prolapse and rectocele associated with obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS). Perineal procedures can be considered as first options in young men in whom an abdominal approach poses risks of sexual dysfunction and in selected women with isolated posterior compartment prolapse who failed conservative treatment. About 20 years ago, we described endorectal proctopexy (ERPP) also known as internal Delorme procedure. The aim of the present study was to describe, with attention to technical details and the aid of a video, the different steps of ERPP for the treatment of ODS. A retrospective analysis of our last 100 cases confirms our initial good results. Complications included suture line dehiscence with consequent stricture in four patients (4%). Bleeding occurred in four (4%) patients and was conservatively treated. Transient anal continence impairment consisting of urgency and soiling occurred in 12 (12%) and 6 (6%) patients, respectively. At 6-month follow-up the Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score and ODS score improved from a median preoperative value of 18.9 and 18.5 to 5 and 5, respectively (p < 0.0001). The mean follow-up was 36.05 ± 13.3 (range 12-58) months and anatomical recurrence rate was 6 (%). Due to its excellent safety profile and the ability to tailor the procedure to different disease presentations, we think that ERPP should be part of the basic armamentarium of all colorectal surgeons operating on the pelvic floor.

Long-term annual functional outcome after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for rectoanal intussusception and/or rectocele: evaluation of sustained improvement.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the long-term annual functional results and quality of life (QOL) after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) for rectoanal intussusception (RAI) and/or rectocele. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. The study was conducted on patients who underwent LVR for RAI and/or rectocele at our institution between February 2012 and July 2015. The Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI), Constipation Scoring System (CSS), and QOL instruments (i.e., 36-item Short-form Health Survey [SF-36], Patient Assessment of Constipation-QOL [PAC-QOL] scale, and Fecal Incontinence-QOL [FIQL]) were administered before and annually after surgery. The sustainability of substantial symptom improvement (reduction of at least 50% in CSS or FISI scores) postoperatively was evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients (median age 76 [range 60-93] years, 48 women [94%]) were analyzed. No mortality or major morbidity occurred. After a median follow-up of 60 months (range 12-84 months), no mesh-related complications occurred. The median CSS and FISI scores were significantly reduced at 1 year and remained significantly reduced for 7 years. In patients who reported symptom scores ≥ 3 times postoperatively, sustained improvement of constipation and fecal incontinence was found in about 50% (18/38) and 75% (26/35) of relevant patients, respectively. All PAC-QOL and FIQL scales significantly improved over time for 5 years. Of the SF-36 scales, four showed significant improvement at 1 year but none was significantly improved after 3 years, except for the social functioning scale. CONCLUSIONS: LVR for RAI and/or rectocele was associated with low morbidity and long-term improvement in symptom-specific QOL. The sustainability of postoperative improvement in fecal incontinence was satisfactory, and that in constipation was fair.

Improvement in Outlet Obstructive Constipation Symptoms After Vaginal Stent Treatment for Rectocele.

Objective. The objective is to determine the possible improvement in outlet obstructive constipation symptoms after vaginal stent treatment for rectocele. Methods. Female patients with rectocele (n = 156) accompanied with outlet obstructive constipation were selected in this study. Longo's obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) questionnaire, rectoanal pressures, and rectal balloon expulsion (BET) were evaluated at baseline, 1 month follow-up, and 6 months follow-up. Moreover, the side effects and the potential reasons for giving up treatment were also detected. Results. Vaginal stent significantly decreased the straining intensity, shortened the straining extensity time, decreased the use of laxatives, and alleviated the symptoms of incomplete evacuation (P < .05). The vaginal stent also increased the rectal pressure and shortened the balloon expulsion time (P < .05). Conclusions. As an effective, feasible, and safe procedure, the vaginal stent can be recommended as a treatment of choice for rectocele combined with outlet obstructive constipation.

[Influence of complex rehabilitation programs on the uterine blood flow in patients of different age after plastic surgery for rectocele]. / Vliyanie reabilitatsionnykh kompleksnykh programm na pokazateli matochnogo krovotoka po dannym 3D-ekhodopplerografii u patsientok raznykh vozrastnykh grupp posle plasticheskoi operatsii po povodu rektotsele.

OBJECTIVE: To develop the optimized complex programs, including general magnetotherapy, fractional microablative therapy with a CO2 laser, electromyostimulation with biofeedback of the pelvic floor muscles, and a special exercise therapy complex in late rehabilitation programs for women of different age after reconstructive plastic surgery for rectocele. MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 200 women of childbearing, peri- and menopausal age with rectocele grade II-III and 20 healthy women of comparable age. All patients were divided into 4 groups by 50 womes: main group, two comparison groups and control group. Surgical treatment of rectocele was followed by long-term postoperative rehabilitation including symptomatic therapy, general magnetotherapy, and electromyostimulation with biofeedback of the pelvic floor muscles, intra-vaginal fractional microablative therapy with a CO2 laser and special complex of therapeutic physical education. RESULTS: General magnetotherapy in early (1 day) postoperative period and complex rehabilitation in long-term postoperative period (within a month after surgery) including 2 procedures of intra-vaginal microablative fractional therapy with carbon dioxide laser, electromyostimulation with biological connection of the pelvic floor muscles and special complex of therapeutic physical education ensured more significant improvement of uterine blood flow regardless age and baseline disorders in the uterine arteries in patients with rectocele. In our opinion, this is primarily due to vasoactive effects of general magnetotherapy, recovery of circulation via relief of spasm in the arteries and arterioles, improved vein contractility and venous outflow. These processes combined with electrical stimulation and therapeutic exercises of pelvic floor muscle followed by their reinforcement, as well as fractional microablative therapy ensured significant vascular effect.

Functional Outcome and Sexual-Related Quality of Life After Transperineal Versus Transvaginal Repair of Anterior Rectocele: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Methods of treatment of rectocele include transperineal, transvaginal, and transanal approaches and ventral rectopexy. OBJECTIVE: The present randomized study aimed to compare the outcome of transperineal repair and transvaginal repair of anterior rectocele. DESIGN: This is a randomized, single-blinded clinical trial. SETTING: This study was conducted at the Colorectal Surgery Unit, Mansoura University Hospitals. PATIENTS: Adult female patients with anterior rectocele reporting obstructed defecation syndrome were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Anterior rectocele was surgically treated via a transperineal or transvaginal approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Improvement in constipation, operation time, hospital stay, complications, changes in anal pressures, and improvement in sexual-related quality of life was assessed by use of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, and the incidence of dyspareunia postoperatively was assessed. RESULTS: Sixty-four female patients of a mean age of 43.5 years were entered into the trial. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the operation time. Patients undergoing transperineal repair had significantly longer hospital stays than those undergoing transvaginal repair (2.4 vs 2.1 days, p = 0.03). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding postoperative complications and recurrence of rectocele. Significant decrease in the constipation scores was recorded in both groups at 6 and 12 months after surgery. The decrease in the constipation scores after transvaginal repair was significantly higher than after transperineal repair at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Although resting and squeeze anal pressures were significantly increased at 12 months after transperineal repair, they did not show significant change after transvaginal repair. Improvement in sexual-related quality of life was significantly higher in the transvaginal repair group than in the transperineal repair group at 6 and 12 months after surgery. Dyspareunia improved after transvaginal repair and worsened after transperineal repair, yet this change was insignificant. LIMITATIONS: This was a single-center study comprising a relatively small number of patients. CONCLUSION: Transvaginal repair of rectocele achieved better improvement in constipation and sexual-related quality of life than transperineal repair. Changes in dyspareunia after both techniques were not significant. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B148. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03801291. RESULTADO FUNCIONAL Y CALIDAD DE VIDA RELACIONADA CON EL SEXO DESPUÉS DE LA REPARACIÓN TRANSPERINEAL VERSUS TRANSVAGINAL DEL RECTOCELE ANTERIOR: UN ENSAYO CLÍNICO ALEATORIZADO: Los métodos de tratamiento del rectocele incluyen los abordajes transperineal, transvaginal y transanal y la rectopexia ventral.El objetivo del presente estudio aleatorizado fue comparar el resultado de la reparación transperineal y la reparación transvaginal del rectocele anterior.Ensayo clínico aleatorizado, simple ciego.Unidad de Cirugía Colorrectal, Hospital Universitario de Mansoura.Pacientes mujeres adultas con rectocele anterior que se quejan de síndrome de defecación obstruida.Tratamiento quirúrgico del rectocele anterior mediante abordaje transperineal o transvaginal.Mejora en el estreñimiento, tiempo de operación, estancia hospitalaria, complicaciones, cambios en la presión anal, mejoría en la calidad de vida relacionada con el sexo evaluada por el cuestionario PISQ-12 e incidencia de dispareunia postoperatoria.Sesenta y cuatro pacientes de sexo femenino de una edad media de 43.5 años ingresaron al ensayo. No hubo diferencias significativas entre los dos grupos con respecto al tiempo de operación. La reparación transperineal tuvo una estancia hospitalaria significativamente más prolongada que la reparación transvaginal (2.4 Vs 2.1 días, p = 0.03). No hubo diferencias significativas entre ambos grupos con respecto a las complicaciones postoperatorias y la recurrencia del rectocele. Se registró una disminución significativa en las puntuaciones de estreñimiento en ambos grupos a los 6 y 12 meses después de la cirugía. La disminución en las puntuaciones de estreñimiento después de la reparación transvaginal fue significativamente mayor que después de la reparación transperineal a los 6 y 12 meses después de la operación. Aunque las presiones anales de reposo y compresión aumentaron significativamente a los 12 meses después de la reparación transperineal, no mostraron cambios significativos después de la reparación transvaginal. La mejora en la calidad de vida relacionada con el sexo fue significativamente mayor en la reparación transvaginal que en el grupo de reparación transperineal a los 6 y 12 meses después de la cirugía. La dispareunia mejoró después de la reparación transvaginal y empeoró después de la reparación transperineal, sin embargo, este cambio fue insignificante.Estudio de un solo centro que comprende un número relativamente pequeño de pacientes.La reparación transvaginal del rectocele logró una mejoría en el estreñimiento y la calidad de vida relacionada con el sexo que la reparación transperineal. Los cambios en la dispareunia después de ambas técnicas no fueron significativos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B148.Ensayos clínicos. Identificador del gobierno: NCT03801291.

Transanal repair of rectocele: prospective assessment of functional outcome and quality of life.

AIM: This study aimed to assess the functional outcome of transanal repair of rectocele using patient symptom scores and quality of life (QOL) instruments. METHOD: Patients who underwent transanal repair for symptomatic rectocele between February 2012 and August 2017 were included. This study was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. A standard questionnaire including the Constipation Scoring System (CSS), the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI) and QOL instruments [Patient Assessment of Constipation (PAC)-QOL, Fecal Incontinence QOL Scale, Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36)] was administered before and after the operation. Physiological assessment and proctography were performed before and after the operation. RESULTS: Thirty patients were included. The median follow-up was 36 (6-72) months. Postoperative proctography showed a reduction in rectocele size [34 mm (14-52 mm) vs 10 mm (0-28 mm), P < 0.0001]. Physiological assessment showed no significant postoperative changes. Constipation was improved in 15/21 patients (71%) at 1 year and 14/20 patients (70%) at the mid-term follow-up. The CSS score reduced at 3 months [12 (8-12) vs 6 (1-12), P < 0.0001] and remained significantly reduced over time until the mid-term follow-up. Faecal incontinence was improved in two-thirds patients at 1 year. Four patients developed new-onset faecal incontinence. All the PAC-QOL scale scores significantly improved over time until 1 year, while two of the eight SF-36 scale scores showed significant postoperative improvement. CONCLUSION: Transanal repair for rectocele improves constipation and constipation-specific QOL.

Specific Changes in Manometric Parameters are Associated with Non-improvement in Symptoms after Rectocele Repair.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The present study aimed to assess the changes in manometric parameters after transperineal repair (TPR) of rectocele and interpret failure of symptom improvement in light of these changes. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study on patients with anterior rectocele who underwent TPR in the period of February 2016 to February 2019. Data collected included patients' demographics, rectocele size, Wexner constipation and incontinence scores, anal pressures, and rectal sensation before and 12 months after TPR. Analysis of data was done by paired t-test and chi-square test. RESULTS: Forty-six female patients with a mean age of 43.2 ± 10.7 years were included. After a mean follow-up of 13.9 ± 2.7 months, 30 (65.2%) patients reported clinical improvement and 16 (34.8%) had no significant improvement. At 12 months after rectocele repair, the entire cohort studied showed an insignificant increase in the mean anal pressures and a significant decrease in the thresholds of first rectal sensation, first urge, intense urge, and maximum tolerable volume (MTV). Patients who clinically improved showed similar physiologic changes to the entire cohort examined, whereas patients who had no clinical improvement showed significant increases in the mean anal pressures and insignificant decreases in rectal sensation and MTV. CONCLUSION: Patients who showed clinical improvement showed insignificant increases in anal pressures and significant decreases in thresholds of first rectal sensation, first urge, intense urge, and MTV. Contrarily, patients who did not show clinical improvement showed significant increases in anal pressures and insignificant reduction in sensory thresholds.

Does concurrent posterior repair for an asymptomatic rectocele reduce the risk of surgical failure in patients undergoing sacrocolpopexy?

PURPOSE: To determine if a concurrent posterior repair for an asymptomatic rectocele at the time of sacrocolpopexy reduces the incidence of surgical failure. METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review with a cross-sectional follow-up survey of all patients who underwent sacrocolpopexy from 2004 to 2014. Demographic and operative data were collected from the medical record. For the cross-sectional portion, patients were contacted to obtain information on symptoms and retreatment after surgery. In this study, we included patients with an asymptomatic rectocele on examination, defined as Ap or Bp ≥ -1 on POP-Q without defecatory dysfunction, which was defined as constipation based on the Rome III criteria, dyschezia, excessive straining and/or splinting to have a bowel movement. The primary outcome was a composite score of subjective bulge symptoms or retreatment for prolapse. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-four patients met the inclusion criteria: 185 (53.8%) had a sacrocolpopexy only (SCP) and 159 (46.2%) had a concurrent posterior repair (SCP + PR). The composite failure rate was 10.2% (95% CI = 7.4-13.8%), with a 13.5% (25) failure rate in the SCP group compared with 6.3% (10) in the SCP + PR group (p = 0.03). On multivariable logistic regression, the adjusted odds of failure was 2.79 in the SCP compared with the SCP + PR group (CI 1.25-6.23; P = 0.01). The rates of de novo defecatory dysfunction following surgery were low (SCP = 5.6% vs. SCP + PR = 7.5%, p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with asymptomatic rectoceles, a concurrent posterior repair at the time of sacrocolpopexy reduces the odds of composite patient-centered failure without an increased rate of dyspareunia or de novo defecatory dysfunction.

Impact of TRREMS on symptoms of obstructed defecation due to rectocele: predictive factors and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the transanal repair of rectocele and rectal mucosectomy with a single circular stapler (TRREMS) on the treatment of obstructed defecation due to rectocele and to identify the predictive factors for unsuccessful results. METHODS: Consecutive patients with obstructed defecation symptoms (ODS) associated with rectocele who had the TRREMS procedure were included. Each patient was assessed by echodefecography, manometry, and colonic transit time as well as the Cleveland Clinic constipation score (CCS) before therapy and at follow-up after 6 months. Reduction in the CCS score was calculated as a ratio. Factors correlated with a decrease in the CCS were analyzed in a univariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients were included. Nineteen patients had postoperative complications that were not severe: 7 (8.6%) had tenesmus, 6 (7.4%) stenosis (4 treated with digital dilatation and 2 with endoscopic stricturectomy), 4 (4.9%) residual mucosal prolapse treated with rubber band ligation, 1 (1.2%) early bleeding, and 1(1.2%) thrombosis. Seventy-nine (97.5%) patients had a significant clinical response with significant reduction of the CCS constipation score from median 13 (range 17-10) to 4 (range, 8-2) (p = 0.0001); only 2 patients (2.5%) had an unsatisfactory response, complaining of straining and vaginal digitation during the evacuatory effort. Patients with anismus previously treated with biofeedback had a lower reduction ratio of the CCS score compared with patients without anismus (61.2 ± 2.8% versus 70.9% ± 1.5, p = 0.0006). There were no significant differences in the reduction of the CCS according to age, parity, type of delivery, previous hysterectomy, post-menopausal status, rectal mucosal prolapse and/or associated rectal intussusception, grade of rectocele and presence of complications. CONCLUSIONS: The TRREMS procedure significantly improved evacuation disorders in this study. Appropriate selection of patients is key for the success of this approach. Anismus even if previously treated with biofeedback, was the main predictive factor of unsuccessful treatment.

Assessment of anal sphincter distensibility following the STARR procedure: a pilot study.

Aim: The STARR (Stapled Trans-Anal Rectal Resection) procedure consists of a surgical correction of symptomatic rectocele refractory to medical treatment, involving anal dilatation. The aim of the study was to determine the impact of the STARR procedure on anal distensibility using EndoFLIP® device.Methods: All female patients with a minimal rectocele of 3 cm and with symptoms of obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) refractory to medical treatment were included prospectively. Patients with previous anal incontinence were not included. Wexner, ODS and Kess scores were recorded. Endoanal ultrasounds and EndoFLIP® measurements were performed pre-surgery and 3 months following the STARR procedure. The distensibility index (DI) at 40 mL of inflation at rest was the primary study endpoint.Results: Seven patients (median age: 52.5, range: 44-62) were included between 2014 and 2017. The DI after surgery was the same as the pre-surgery DI. No patient developed symptoms of faecal incontinence or urge to defecate in the three months following the STARR procedure. All patients reported an improvement in their ODS and Kess scores three months after the STARR procedure. No anal sphincter defects were detected by endoanal ultrasound.Conclusion: Anal dilatation did not appear to alter anal distensibility in patients with a normal anal function before the STARR procedure.

[Myostimulating effect of comprehensive application of general magnetotherapy, fractional CO2 laser, electro-myostimulation and special complex of exercise in patients with rectoceleal after open-peconstructure]. / Miostimuliruyushchii effekt kompleksnogo primeneniya obshchei magnitoterapii, fraktsionnogo CO2-lazera, elektromiostimulyatsii i spetsial'nogo kompleksa LFK u patsientok s rektotsele posle rekonstruktivno-plasticheskikh operatsii.

The article presents data on the treatment of 200 women of childbearing, peri - and menopausal age with rectocele of II-III degree, which were divided into 4 groups comparable in clinical and functional characteristics: 1-50 patients who, after surgical treatment of rectocele, underwent a complex consisting of a course of General magnetic therapy, 2 intra-vascular procedures of fractional microablative CO2 laser therapy, electromyostimulation with the pelvic floor muscles and a special complex of therapeutic physical education; comparison 1, which included 50 patients who underwent the above-mentioned complex of rehabilitation measures without General magnetotherapy; comparison of 2-50 patients after surgical treatment of rectocele, who in the late postoperative period (one month after the operation) underwent a set of rehabilitation measures, including a course of electromyostimulation with the biological connection of the pelvic floor muscles, consisting of 10 daily procedures and a special complex of physical therapy and a control group - 50 patients after surgical treatment of rectocele, who in the late postoperative period were treated with symptomatic therapy, including painkillers and antispasmodics, which served as a background for all other groups. As a result of the research, it was found that the developed rehabilitation complexes have a pronounced myostimulating effect, and can be recommended for wide use in rehabilitation programs for postoperative management of patients with rectocele.