Ventral mesh rectopexy versus conventional suture technique: a single-institutional experience.

AIMS: Anterior mesh rectopexy is a novel surgical technique for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse, a common disorder in female elderly patients. Aim of the study was to evaluate functional outcomes after ventral mesh rectopexy and conventional suture rectopexy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients have been enrolled in this prospective study. Patients were divided into two groups: 20 patients (group A) had a conventional suture rectopexy with a standard technique and 20 patients (group B) underwent an anterior mesh rectopexy. Each patient had a clinic and defecographic diagnosis of full-thickness rectal prolapse, which was further investigated with manometry and clinical questionnaires (Wexner Constipation and Incontinence Score, Rome III criteria). Postoperative outcomes were evaluated through clinical questionnaires, a rigid rectosigmoidoscopy and a defecography, 1 year after surgery. RESULTS: Preoperative Wexner constipation score was greater than 15 in all the patients (21 in group A and 22 in group B); median postoperative score was 15 in group A and 11 in group B, and the difference was significant. Median preoperative incontinence score was 11 in group A and 12 in group B; median postoperative score was 9 in group A and 6 in group B. Three patients experienced recurrence in group A and only 1 patient in group B. CONCLUSION: Ventral mesh rectopexy is feasible, safe and effective for the treatment of full-thickness rectal prolapse in a well-fit geriatric population. Better functional results have been achieved compared with conventional suture technique with a trend toward a lower recurrence rate.

Cancer recurrence following conversion during laparoscopic colorectal resections: a meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence regarding long-term oncological outcomes following conversion to open surgery (COS) during laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCR) is controversial. The aim of this study is to assess the impact on cancer recurrence of a failed laparoscopic attempt. METHODS: MEDLINE, Scopus and ISI Web of Knowledge databases were searched for articles reporting data on cancer recurrence in patients undergoing completed LCR and COS. Data were pooled by fixed or random effect modeling, according to the presence of heterogeneity. Primary outcomes were local recurrence (LR) and distance recurrence (DR). RESULTS: Seven studies involving 2493 patients (completed LCR, n 2201 and COS, n 292) were included. The pooled analysis showed that COS resections have an higher risk of LR (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14-3.42, p = 0.1); no difference was found in DR (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.67-1.77, p = 0.71). However, an higher rate of T4 tumor was present in the converted group (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.71-4, p = 0.0). Subgroup analysis including studies with T stage matched populations showed no significant statistical difference in LR rate; however, a trend toward higher recurrence was still clear. CONCLUSION: There is no consistent evidence that a failed laparoscopic attempt does not result in a poorer oncological outcome; therefore, a careful selection of patients for LCR for cancer is required.