Rectal Prolapse After Laparoscopically Assisted Anorectoplasty for Anorectal Malformations.

Aim: To clarify the characteristics of patients with rectal prolapse after laparoscopically assisted anorectoplasty (LAARP), estimate the causes, and evaluate its impact on postoperative bowel function. Methods: The medical records of patients who underwent LAARP for high- or intermediate-type anorectal malformation between 2000 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical data were compared between patients with (Group P) and without prolapse (normal, Group N). Fecal continence was evaluated using the clinical assessment score for fecal continence developed by the Japanese Study Group of Anorectal Anomalies. For patients who underwent pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before LAARP, atrophy, or asymmetry of the anal sphincter and levator ani was evaluated by a radiologist. Results: Of the 49 patients, 29 (59%) had rectal prolapse after LAARP (Group P) and 20 did not (Group N). We found no significant difference in gender, type of malformations, incidence of associated spinal or lumbosacral anomalies, procedure time, and postoperative bowel function at ages 4, 8, 12, and 16 years. However, LAARP was performed significantly earlier in Group N (median [range], 180 [123-498] days) than in Group P (210 [141-570] days). In Group P, 18 patients (62%) developed prolapse before colostomy takedown. Eight of 26 patients who underwent surgical prolapse repair required redo procedures. Twenty-five patients who underwent preoperative pelvic MRI showed no significant relationship between the muscular abnormalities and the incidence of postoperative rectal prolapse. Conclusions: Although recurrence is common, performing LAARP at a younger age might prevent postoperative prolapse development.

Surgical Management of Rectal Prolapse in Infants and Children.

The surgical management of children with rectal prolapse is wide ranging and without consensus within the pediatric surgical community. While the majority of rectal prolapse in infants and children resolves spontaneously or with the medical management of constipation, a small but significant subset of patients may require intervention for persistent symptoms. In this review, we discuss the etiology and pathophysiology of rectal prolapse in both infants and children, options for medical management, described interventions and surgical options and their outcomes, and future avenues for research and investigation.

Colorectal Surgery Review for Primary Care Providers.

Colon and rectal disorders can be functional and inflammatory. This is the second paper of a three-part series14 and will focus on the diagnosis and treatment of rectal prolapse, fecal incontinence and inflammatory bowel disease.

Long-term Anatomical and Functional Results of Robot-Assisted Pelvic Floor Surgery for the Management of Multicompartment Prolapse: A Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Long-term data on robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy for the treatment of multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse are scarce. With the rising prevalence of prolapse and increasing surgical repair, it is essential to evaluate long-term results. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate long-term functional and anatomic outcomes after sacrocolporectopexy. DESIGN: This is a prospective, observational cohort study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a teaching hospital with tertiary referral function for patients with gynecological/rectal prolapse. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy from 2011 to 2012 were included. INTERVENTION: Robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the anatomic cure rate after 1 and 4 years, defined as simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification stage 1 vaginal apical prolapse and no external rectal prolapse or internal rectal prolapse present. Kaplan-Meier curves were used for determination of recurrence-free intervals. Secondary outcomes were functional pelvic floor symptoms (symptoms of bulge, obstructed defecation, fecal incontinence, urogenital distress inventory) and quality of life (Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire). RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were included. After 12 and 48 months, the recurrence-free intervals based on Kaplan-Meier estimates were 100% and 90%. In total, there were 10 recurrences: 2 apical and 8 internal rectal prolapses. Symptoms of bulge (94%-12%; p < 0.0005), fecal incontinence (62%-32%; p < 0.0005), obstructed defecation (59%-24%; p = 0.008), and median Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire scores (124-5; p = 0.022) improved significantly at final follow-up. Median urogenital distress inventory scores showed improvement after 1 year (30-13; p = 0.021). LIMITATIONS: This was an observational, single-center study with selective postoperative imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Ninety percent of patients were recurrence free 48 months after robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy. Symptoms of vaginal bulge, quality of life, constipation, and fecal incontinence improved significantly. However, a subgroup of patients showed persistent bowel complaints that underlie the complexity of multicompartment prolapse. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B265. RESULTADOS ANATÓMICOS Y FUNCIONALES A LARGO PLAZO DE LA CIRUGÍA DE PISO PÉLVICO ASISTIDA POR ROBOT EN EL TRATAMIENTO DEL PROLAPSO MULTICOMPARTIMENTAL: UN ESTUDIO PROSPECTIVO: Los datos a largo plazo sobre la sacrocolporectopexia asistida por robot para el tratamiento del prolapso multicompartimental de órganos pélvicos son escasos. Con el aumento de la prevalencia del prolapso y el aumento de la reparación quirúrgica, es esencial evaluar los resultados a largo plazo.Evaluar los resultados funcionales y anatómicos a largo plazo después de la sacrocolporectopexia.Estudio prospectivo observacional de cohorte.Hospital de enseñanza con función de referencia terciaria para pacientes con prolapso ginecológico/rectal.Todos los pacientes sometidos a sacrocolporectopexia asistida por robot en 2011-2012.Sacrocolporectopexia asistida por robot.El resultado primario fue la tasa de curación anatómica a uno y cuatro años, definida como etapa 1 de prolapso apical vaginal en la cuantificación del prolapso de órganos pélvicos simplificado, y sin prolapso rectal externo o prolapso rectal interno presentes. Se utilizaron curvas de Kaplan Meier para determinar los intervalos libres de recurrencia. Los resultados secundarios fueron síntomas funcionales del piso pélvico (síntomas de abultamiento, obstrucción defecatoria, incontinencia fecal, inventario de molestias urogenitales) y calidad de vida (cuestionario de impacto del piso pélvico).Se incluyeron 53 pacientes. Después de 12 y 48 meses, el intervalo libre de recurrencia basado en las estimaciones con método Kaplan Meier fue del 100% y 90%, respectivamente. En total hubo diez recurrencias: dos apicales y ocho prolapsos rectales internos. Los síntomas de abultamiento (94% a 12%; p <0.0005), incontinencia fecal (62% a 32%; p <0.0005), obstrucción defecatoria (59% a 24%; p = 0.008) y puntajes promedio del cuestionario de impacto del piso pélvico (124 a 5; p = 0.022) mejoraron significativamente en el seguimiento final. Las puntuaciones medias del inventario de molestias urogenitales mostraron una mejoría después de un año (30 a 13; p = 0.021).Estudio observacional de centro único con imagenología postoperatoria selectiva.Noventa por ciento de los pacientes estaban libres de recurrencia 48 meses después de la sacrocolporectopexia asistida por robot. Los síntomas de abultamiento vaginal, la calidad de vida, el estreñimiento y la incontinencia fecal mejoraron significativamente. Sin embargo, un subgrupo de pacientes mostró molestias intestinales persistentes que subrayan a la complejidad del prolapso multicompartimental. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B265.

Application of a score for evaluation of pain, distress and discomfort in pigs with lameness and prolapses: correlation with saliva biomarkers and severity of the disease.

A score system was used to evaluate pain, distress and discomfort in healthy pigs and pigs with two different diseases: lameness and rectal prolapse. In addition, correlations between the results of this score and a panel of salivary biomarkers and severity of disease were studied. This panel included biomarkers of stress (cortisol, salivary alpha-amylase (sAA), total esterase activity (TEA), butyrylcholinesterase (BChE) and lipase (Lip)), immunity (adenosine deaminase isozymes 1 (ADA1) and 2 (ADA2)) and oxidative status (uric acid (UA), Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC), cupric reducing antioxidant capacity (CUPRAC), ferric reducing ability of saliva (FRAS), advanced oxidation protein products (AOPP) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)). Based on their score, diseased animals were subdivided in those without and with evident pain. Lame pigs and prolapsed pigs with pain showed higher salivary levels of cortisol, sAA, TEA, BChE, ADA1 and ADA2 compared with the healthy pigs. In addition, the prolapsed pigs with pain showed higher levels of FRAS, AOPP and H2O2 compared with the healthy animals. Salivary cortisol, TEA, BChE, ADA isozymes 1 and 2, FRAS and AOPP correlated with the pain score. This five-point pain score system can be easily applied to lame and prolapsed pigs, and salivary biomarkers could be used as an additional tool for pain assessment in those pigs.

Stepped-wedge randomised trial of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy in adults with chronic constipation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) is an established treatment for external full-thickness rectal prolapse. However, its clinical efficacy in patients with internal prolapse is uncertain due to the lack of high-quality evidence. METHODS: An individual level, stepped-wedge randomised trial has been designed to allow observer-blinded data comparisons between patients awaiting LVMR with those who have undergone surgery. Adults with symptomatic internal rectal prolapse, unresponsive to prior conservative management, will be eligible to participate. They will be randomised to three arms with different delays before surgery (0, 12 and 24 weeks). Efficacy outcome data will be collected at equally stepped time points (12, 24, 36 and 48 weeks). The primary objective is to determine clinical efficacy of LVMR compared to controls with reduction in the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) at 24 weeks serving as the primary outcome. Secondary objectives are to determine: (1) the clinical effectiveness of LVMR to 48 weeks to a maximum of 72 weeks; (2) pre-operative determinants of outcome; (3) relevant health economics for LVMR; (4) qualitative evaluation of patient and health professional experience of LVMR and (5) 30-day morbidity and mortality rates. DISCUSSION: An individual-level, stepped-wedge, randomised trial serves the purpose of providing an untreated comparison for the active treatment group, while at the same time allowing the waiting-listed participants an opportunity to obtain the intervention at a later date. In keeping with the basic ethical tenets of this design, the average waiting time for LVMR (12 weeks) will be shorter than that for routine services (24 weeks). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN11747152 . Registered on 30 September 2015. The trial was prospectively registered (first patient enrolled on 21 March 2016).

Should we offer ventral rectopexy to patients with recurrent external rectal prolapse?

BACKGROUND: For patients with rectal prolapse undergoing Ventral Rectopexy (VR), the impact of prior prolapse surgery on prolapse recurrence is not well described. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare recurrence rates after VR in patients undergoing primary and repeat rectal prolapse repairs. DESIGN: This study is a prospective cohort study. METHODS: IRB-approved prospective data registry of consecutive patients undergoing VR for full-thickness external rectal prolapse between 2009 and 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rectal prolapse recurrence was defined as either external prolapse through the anal sphincters or symptomatic rectal mucosa prolapse warranting additional surgery. Preoperative and postoperative morbidity and functional outcomes were analyzed. Actuarial recurrence rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 108 VRs were performed during the study period. Seventy-two were primary and 36 repeat repairs. Seven cases were open, 23 laparoscopic, and 78 robotic. Six cases were converted from laparoscopic/robotic to open. In 63 patients, VR was combined with gynecological procedures. There were no statistical differences between primary or recurrent prolapse for the following: demographics, operative time, concomitant gynecologic procedures, complications, blood loss, and graft material type. Length of stay was longer in patients with a history of prior prolapse surgery (p = 0.01). Prolapse recurrence rates for primary repairs were reported at 1.4, 6.9, and 9.7% and for recurrent prolapse procedures 13.9, 25, and 25% at 1, 3, and 5 years (p = 0.13). Mean length of follow-up was similar between groups. Time to recurrence was significantly shorter in patients undergoing repeat prolapse surgery 8.8 vs 30.7 months (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: VR is a better option for patients undergoing primary rectal prolapse repair.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for obstructed defecation in patients with overt pelvic structural abnormalities-a Chinese pilot study.

AIM: As laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) gained increasing popularity in the past decade, studies from non-western area remain rare. The aim of this pilot study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LVR for obstructed defecation (OD) in Chinese patients with overt pelvic structural abnormalities. METHODS: A series of 19 consecutive patients is presented undergoing LVR for OD. All patients showed various forms of pelvic structural abnormalities which were verified by dynamic defecography exam. Data was prospectively recorded and the functional outcomes were evaluated using the Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score (CCCS) and Patients Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life Score (PAC-QoL). RESULTS: Pelvic structural abnormalities of the 19 patients included external rectal prolapse (ER) in 10.5% (2/19), high grade internal rectal prolapse (IR) in 57.8% (11/19), rectocele in 52.6% (10/19), enterocele in 15.7% (3/19), cystocele/vaginal prolapse in 15.7 (3/19), descending perineum (DP) in 63.5% (12/19). 89.4% patients (17/19) showed at least two co-existed abnormalities and 15.7% (3/19) showed multicompartmental abnormalities. The mean follow-up was 9 months (range 1-18). No mesh-related complication was observed. At last available follow-up (LAFU), improvement of OD symptom was observed in 15 (78.9%) patients, the mean scores of CCCS decreased from 17 to 10 (p < 0.05), all four subsets of PAC-QoL scores improved, and three of them (physical discomfort, worries and concerns, satisfaction) showed statistical significance (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy appears to be a safe and effective procedure for obstructed defecation in Chinese patients with overt pelvic structural abnormalities in short-term follow-up.

Risk Factors for Recurrence After Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy effectively treats posterior compartment prolapse. However, recurrence after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate factors contributing to recurrence after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed of patients who underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy between June 2008 and June 2014. Patients presenting with full-thickness rectal prolapse were compared against the rest. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine predictors for recurrence. Operative findings of redo cases were evaluated. SETTINGS: This study was conducted under the supervision of a single pelvic floor surgeon. PATIENTS: A total of 231 patients with a median follow-up of 47 months were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinicopathological risk factors and technical failures contributing to recurrence were analyzed. RESULTS: The overall recurrence rate was 11.7% (n = 27). Twenty-five recurrences occurred in patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse, of which 16 were full-thickness recurrences (14.2% (16/113)). Multivariate analyses showed predictors for recurrence to be prolonged pudendal nerve terminal motor latency (HR = 5.57 (95% CI, 1.13 - 27.42); p = 0.04) and the use of synthetic mesh as compared with biologic grafts (HR = 4.24 (95% CI, 1.27-14.20); p = 0.02). Age >70 years and poorer preoperative continence were also associated with recurrence on univariate analysis. Technical failures contributing to recurrence included mesh detachment from the sacral promontory and inadequate midrectal mesh fixation. LIMITATIONS: Modifications to the operative technique were made throughout the study period. A postoperative defecating proctogram was not routinely performed. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy is multifactorial, and risk factors are both clinical and technical. The use of biologic grafts was associated with lower recurrence as compared with synthetic mesh. Patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse who are elderly, have poorer baseline continence, and have prolonged pudendal nerve terminal motor latency are at increased risk of recurrence.

Robot-Assisted Sacrocolporectopexy for Multicompartment Prolapse of the Pelvic Floor: A Prospective Cohort Study Evaluating Functional and Sexual Outcome.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic floor disorders are a major public health issue. For female genital prolapse, sacrocolpopexy is the gold standard. Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy is a relatively new and promising technique correcting rectal prolapse. There is no literature combining the 2 robotically assisted techniques. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to evaluate the safety, quality of life, and functional and sexual outcomes of robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy for multicompartment prolapse of the pelvic floor. DESIGN: This was a prospective, observational cohort study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted in a tertiary care setting. PATIENTS: All sexually active patients undergoing robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy at our institution between 2012 and 2014 were included. INTERVENTION: Robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy was the study intervention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative and postoperative (12 months) questionnaires using the Urinary Distress Inventory, Pescatori Incontinence Scale, Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire were completed. In addition Wexner and Vaizey incontinence scores and the Wexner constipation score were recorded postoperatively. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients underwent robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy (median follow-up, 12.5 months). The simplified Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification improved significantly (p < 0.0005) for all 4 of the anatomic landmarks. Both median fecal (preoperative and postoperative Pescatori 4 vs 3, p = 0.002) and urinary incontinence scores (Urinary Distress Inventory, 27.8 vs 22.2; p < 0.0005) improved significantly at 12 months. Postoperatively median Wexner (3) and Vaizey incontinence (6) and Wexner Constipation (7) scores were noted. A positive effect on sexual function (Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire score 31.8 vs 35.9; p = 0.002) and quality of life for each compartment (p < 0.0005) was observed. One patient (2%) developed mesh erosion. No multicompartment recurrences were detected. LIMITATIONS: This was a observational study with a limited follow-up, no control group, and no preoperatively validated constipation score. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy is a safe and effective technique for multicompartment prolapse in terms of functional outcome, quality of life, and sexual function.

Current status of laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for external and internal rectal prolapse.

External and internal rectal prolapse with their affiliated rectocele and enterocele, are associated with debilitating symptoms such as obstructed defecation, pelvic pain and faecal incontinence. Since perineal procedures are associated with a higher recurrence rate, an abdominal approach is commonly preferred. Despite the description of greater than three hundred different procedures, thus far no clear superiority of one surgical technique has been demonstrated. Ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is a relatively new and promising technique to correct rectal prolapse. In contrast to the abdominal procedures of past decades, VMR avoids posterolateral rectal mobilisation and thereby minimizes the risk of postoperative constipation. Because of a perceived acceptable recurrence rate, good functional results and low mesh-related morbidity in the short to medium term, VMR has been popularized in the past decade. Laparoscopic or robotic-assisted VMR is now being progressively performed internationally and several articles and guidelines propose the procedure as the treatment of choice for rectal prolapse. In this article, an outline of the current status of laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for the treatment of internal and external rectal prolapse is presented.

Perineal stapled prolapse resection for full-thickness external rectal prolapse: a multicentre prospective study.

AIM: Many different surgical techniques have been reported for the surgical treatment of full-thickness external rectal prolapse. Perianal stapled prolapse resection (PSP) is a relatively newly reported technique for full thickness external rectal prolapse. The aim of this prospective multicentre study was to evaluate the results of this procedure. METHOD: Consecutive patients who underwent a PSP resection for full-thickness external rectal prolapse at five centres were recruited to the study. Median operating time, hospital stay, complications, recurrence and functional results according to the Wexner Incontinence Scale and obstructive defaecation syndrome score were recorded. RESULTS: There were 27 patients treated by PSP. The median Wexner incontinence score improved from 10 presurgery to 5 after surgery (P < 0.001); the median obstructed defaecation syndrome score improved from 12 presurgery to 5 (range 4-10) after surgery (P < 0.001). A laparoscopically assisted procedure was performed in three patients (11.1%). The median number of cartridges used was six (range four to nine). The median operating time was 48 min. Early complications occurred in six patients (22.2%) and late complications in two (7.4%). The median length of hospital stay was 5 days. The recurrence rate at a median follow-up of 30.3 months was 14.8%. CONCLUSION: PSP appears to be an easy, fast and safe procedure. Early functional results are good. The recurrence rate compares favourably with other perineal procedures like the Delorme or the Altemeier operations. Long-term functional results need to be investigated further.

Bowel function after laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy versus ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a double-blind, randomised single-centre study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse has been widely used over the past decade to reduce postoperative functional bowel disorders. We aimed to compare changes in functional outcome 12 months after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy versus laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy in patients with rectal prolapse. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised trial, consecutive patients aged 18 years or older at a single centre in Denmark with full-thickness rectal prolapse were randomly assigned (1:1) to either laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy or laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy by drawing numbers from opaque envelopes, in blocks of four for patients with or without preoperative constipation. Functional assessment was done preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was preoperative-to-postoperative change in obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) score. Patients and those assessing the outcomes were masked to the procedure. The primary analysis was done in the per-protocol population. Safety outcomes were assessed in the entire cohort. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00946205. FINDINGS: From Nov 1, 2006, to Jan 31, 2014, 75 consecutive patients were assigned to laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy (n=37) or laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (n=38). Eight patients withdrew consent to follow-up, leaving 34 patients in the posterior sutured rectopexy group and 33 in the ventral mesh rectopexy groups for the primary analysis. The preoperative-to-postoperative reduction in ODS score was 1·97 (95% CI 0·01 to 3·93) in patients who received ventral mesh rectopexy and 2·18 (-0·14 to 4·49) in those who received posterior sutured rectopexy (difference -0·21 [-3·19 to 2·78]; p=0·890). Postoperative surgical complications of Clavien-Dindo grade II or worse were reported in one (3%) of 38 patients in the ventral mesh rectopexy group (ureteral injury resulting in urine leakage, and a psoas abscess) and one (3%) of 37 patients in the posterior sutured rectopexy group (haematoma and pelvic abscess). Two (5%) patients in the posterior sutured rectopexy group developed recurrence within 12 months compared with none in the ventral mesh rectopexy group (p=0·305). INTERPRETATION: Functional outcome measured by preoperative-to-postoperative change in ODS score was not significantly superior in patients who underwent ventral mesh rectopexy compared with those who had posterior sutured rectopexy. Additional, large, randomised, multicentre studies with long-term outcomes are warranted. FUNDING: None.

New-onset rectoanal intussusception may not result in symptomatic improvement after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to assess defecatory function in patients who underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) for external rectal prolapse (ERP). METHODS: Thirty-one patients who underwent evacuation proctography 6 months postoperatively were assessed. Preoperative proctography had been performed in 21 patients of these patients. Defecatory function was evaluated using the constipation scoring system (CSS) and fecal incontinence severity index (FISI). RESULTS: The findings of postoperative proctography revealed no full-thickness ERP in any patient, although in 10 patients the ERP was replaced by rectoanal intussusception (RAI). Of the 31 patients, 30 presented with fecal incontinence preoperatively. Ten of 30 had new-onset RAI. Six months postoperatively, a reduction of at least 50 % in the FISI score of the patients with new-onset RAI tended to be significantly smaller than in the patients without RAI (6/10 vs. 18/20, p = 0.141). Seventeen patients presented with obstructed defecation preoperatively. Seven of them had new-onset RAI. Six months postoperatively, a reduction of at least 50 % in their CSS score in the patients with new-onset RAI was significantly smaller than in patients without RAI (0/7 vs. 8/10, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Evacuation proctography showed new-onset RAI in some patients with ERP who underwent LVR, which was associated with a lack of symptomatic improvement.

Long-term Outcome After Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy: An Observational Study of 919 Consecutive Patients.

OBJECTIVE: This multicenter study aims to assess long-term functional outcome, early and late (mesh-related) complications, and recurrences after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) for rectal prolapse syndromes in a large cohort of consecutive patients. BACKGROUND: Long-term outcome data for prolapse repair are rare. A high incidence of mesh-related problems has been noted after transvaginal approaches using nonresorbable meshes. METHODS: All patients treated with LVR at the Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, the Netherlands and the University Hospital Leuven, Belgium between January 1999 and March 2013 were enrolled in this study. All data were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for recurrences and mesh-related problems. RESULTS: 919 consecutive patients (869 women; 50 men) underwent LVR. A 10-year recurrence rate of 8.2% (95% confidence interval, 3.7-12.7) for external rectal prolapse repair was noted. Mesh-related complications were recorded in 18 patients (4.6%), of which mesh erosion to the vagina occurred in 7 patients (1.3%). In 5 of these patients, LVR was combined with a perineotomy. Both rates of fecal incontinence and obstructed defecation decreased significantly (P < 0.0001) after LVR compared to the preoperative incidence (11.1% vs 37.5% for incontinence and 15.6% vs 54.0% for constipation). CONCLUSIONS: LVR is safe and effective for the treatment of different rectal prolapse syndromes. Long-term recurrence rates are in line with classic types of mesh rectopexy and occurrence of mesh-related complications is rare.

Procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids vs traditional surgery for outlet obstructive constipation.

AIM: To compare the clinical efficacies of two surgical procedures for hemorrhoid rectal prolapse with outlet obstruction-induced constipation. METHODS: One hundred eight inpatients who underwent surgery for outlet obstructive constipation caused by internal rectal prolapse and circumferential hemorrhoids at the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University from June 2012 to June 2013 were prospectively included in the study. The patients with rectal prolapse hemorrhoids with outlet obstruction-induced constipation were randomly divided into two groups to undergo either a procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) (n = 54) or conventional surgery (n = 54; control group). Short-term (operative time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative urinary retention, postoperative perianal edema, and postoperative pain) and long-term (postoperative anal stenosis, postoperative sensory anal incontinence, postoperative recurrence, and postoperative difficulty in defecation) clinical effects were compared between the two groups. The short- and long-term efficacies of the two procedures were determined. RESULTS: In terms of short-term clinical effects, operative time and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the PPH group than in the control group (24.36 ± 5.16 min vs 44.27 ± 6.57 min, 2.1 ± 1.4 d vs 3.6 ± 2.3 d, both P < 0.01). The incidence of postoperative urinary retention was higher in the PPH group than in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (48.15% vs 37.04%). The incidence of perianal edema was significantly lower in the PPH group (11.11% vs 42.60%, P < 0.05). The visual analogue scale scores at 24 h after surgery, first defecation, and one week after surgery were significantly lower in the PPH group (2.9 ± 0.9 vs 8.3 ± 1.1, 2.0 ± 0.5 vs 6.5 ± 0.8, and 1.7 ± 0.5 vs 5.0 ± 0.7, respectively, all P < 0.01). With regard to long-term clinical effects, the incidence of anal stenosis was lower in the PPH group than in the control group, but the difference was not significant (1.85% vs 5.56%). The incidence of sensory anal incontinence was significantly lower in the PPH group (3.70% vs 12.96%, P < 0.05). The incidences of recurrent internal rectal prolapse and difficulty in defecation were lower in the PPH group than in the control group, but the differences were not significant (11.11% vs 16.67% and 12.96% vs 24.07%, respectively). CONCLUSION: PPH is superior to the traditional surgery in the management of outlet obstructive constipation caused by internal rectal prolapse with circumferential hemorrhoids.

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.

Anterior rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse: Technical and functional results.

AIM: To assess effectiveness, complications, recurrence rate, and recent improvements of the anterior rectopexy procedure for treatment of total rectal prolapse. METHODS: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and other relevant database were searched to identify studies. Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized studies and original articles in English language, with more than 10 patients who underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse, with a follow-up over 3 mo were considered for the review. RESULTS: Twelve non-randomized case series studies with 574 patients were included in the review. No surgical mortality was described. Conversion was needed in 17 cases (2.9%), most often due to difficult adhesiolysis. Twenty eight patients (4.8%) presented with major complications. Seven (1.2%) mesh-related complications were reported. Most frequent complications were urinary tract infection and urinary retention. Mean recurrence rate was 4.7% with a median follow-up of 23 mo. Improvement of constipation ranged from 3%-72% of the patients and worsening or new onset occurred in 0%-20%. Incontinence improved in 31%-84% patients who presented fecal incontinence at various stages. Evaluation of functional score was disparate between studies. CONCLUSION: Based on the low long-term recurrence rate and favorable outcome data in terms of low de novo constipation rate, improvement of anal incontinence, and low complications rate, laparoscopic anterior rectopexy seems to emerge as an efficient procedure for the treatment of patients with total rectal prolapse.