[Influence of various rehabilitation complexes on sexual function in fertile females and women of perimenopausal and menopausal age after surgery for rectocele]. / Otsenka vliyaniya razlichnykh reabilitatsionnykh kompleksov na seksual'nuyu funktsiyu u patsientok detorodnogo i perimenopauzal'nogo i menopauzal'nogo vozrasta posle operatsii po povodu rektotsele.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of general magnetotherapy, muscle stimulation with biofeedback of pelvic floor muscles, and a special complex of physiotherapy exercises with and without fractional microablative CO2-laser therapy on sexual status in females after plastic surgery for rectocele. MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 200 fertile females and women of perimenopausal and menopausal age with rectocele grade II-III. Various rehabilitation programs were used in delayed postoperative period in order to improve sexual function. Rehabilitation included various combinations general magnetotherapy, electrical muscle stimulation with biofeedback of pelvic floor muscles, intravaginal fractional microablative CO2-laser therapy and a special complex of exercise therapy. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Postoperative rehabilitation including general magnetotherapy, fractional microablative CO2-laser therapy, muscle stimulation with biofeedback of pelvic floor muscles and a special exercise therapy significantly improves sexual function in patients with rectocele. This is true for fertile females and women of perimenopausal and menopausal age. Significant data on PISQ-12 questionnaire (Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire) and Female Sexual Function Index of (FSFI) confirmed these results.

Modified MR defecography without rectal filling in obstructed defecation syndrome: Initial experience.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of dynamic MR defecography before rectal filling in detecting occult anterior compartment prolapse in patients with obstructed defecation. METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the ethics committee. Seventy six females with obstructed defecation underwent dynamic MR defecography before and after rectal filling. Pre-rectal and post-rectal filling sequences were interpreted separately by two radiologists on two different settings with a time interval of one week. Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon's-matched-pairs signed rank test and t-test for matched pairs; differences were considered statistically significant at p<0.05. RESULTS: Fifty eight females of 76 showed additional anterior compartment derangement, with 27 diagnosed only in pre-rectal filling sequence (27/58=46.55%). Following rectal filling detected cystocele in 27 patients was not identified in 14 cases and downgraded in 13. Similarly, detected uterine prolapse in 17 patients was not visualized in 14 patients and downgraded in 3. Furthermore, rectocele was identified in 7 cases before gel enema, additional 32 detected after rectal filling. Significant statistical difference in the detection of both cystocele (p=0.0001) and uterine prolapse (p=0.0013) was identified in the non-filled sequence. CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor imaging before rectal filling is significantly better for detection of anterior compartment prolapse.

Transanal repair for treatment of rectocele in obstructed defaecation: manual or stapled.

AIM: Our aim is to evaluate the results of transanal repair of rectocele, either manual or stapled, considering the anatomic, manometric and symptomatic improvement. METHODS: Forty-five female patients with obstructed defaecation due to anterior rectocele were operated on in the Colorectal Surgery Unit, Mansoura University Hospital, after history taking, detailed questionnaire analysis, barium enema, anorectal manometric studies, EMG studies, anal endosonography, balloon expulsion test, colonic transit time and defaecographic studies. Transanal manual repair was performed for 23 patients (group 1), and transanal stapled repair (group 2) was performed for 22 patients. Postoperative complications were recorded, and the patients were followed up for 1 year. Functional results were evaluated at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery by questionnaire, anorectal manometry and evacuation proctography. RESULTS: Time of operation and hospital stay were significantly shorter in group 2. Postoperatively, there was no mortality or major morbidity. Two patients in group 1 experienced temporary anal incontinence (A3 and B1 stages). There were no reported adverse effects on sexual life, but significant clinical improvement was observed in both groups after surgery. Manometrically, there was a significant improvement in MARP, FLAC, RS, UTDV and MTV in both groups (significantly better in the early postoperative period in the stapled group). Also, follow-up defaecographic findings showed a significant decrease in the rectocele size in all the patients. CONCLUSION: Transanal repair of rectocele is a safe and effective technique in improving symptomatic rectocele. Stapled repair offers the advantage of short operative time, no comorbidity, and shorter hospital stay.

[Functional obstructed defecation syndrome]. / Toiminnallinen ulostamisvaikeusoireyhtymä.

The complex neural coordination and physiology of normal defecation has not yet been completely explained. A defecation event can be disturbed for many reasons, the most common being associated with pregnancy and childbirth, gynaecological descent or neurogenic disturbances of the brain-bowel axis. Causes of obstructed defecation are elucidated by functional imaging and functional investigations of the pelvic floor. Biofeedback treatment can be applied to paradoxal puborectal contraction (anismus), a coordination disturbance of pelvic floor muscles. A new surgical procedure has been developed for the treatment of rectal invagination and rectocele.

Outcomes of stapled transanal rectal resection vs. biofeedback for the treatment of outlet obstruction associated with rectal intussusception and rectocele: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess the safety and outcomes achieved with stapled transanal rectal resection vs. biofeedback training in obstructed defecation patients. METHODS: A total of 119 women patients who suffered from obstructed defecation with associated rectocele and rectal intussusception were randomized to stapled transanal rectal resection or biofeedback training. Stapled transanal rectal resection was performed by using two circular staplers to produce transanal full-thickness rectal resection. Primary outcome was symptoms of obstructed defecation resolution at 12 months; secondary outcomes included safety, change in quality of life score, and anatomic correction of rectocele and rectal intussusception. RESULTS: Fourteen percent (8/59) stapled transanal rectal resection and 50 percent (30/60) biofeedback training patients withdrew early. Eight (15 percent) patients treated with stapled transanal rectal resection and 1 (2 percent) biofeedback patient experienced adverse events. One serious adverse event (bleeding) occurred after stapled transanal rectal resection. Scores of obstructed defecation improved significantly in both groups as did quality of life (both P < 0.0001). Successful treatment was observed in 44 (81.5 percent) stapled transanal rectal resection vs. 13 (33.3 percent) evaluable biofeedback training patients (P < 0.0001). Functional benefit was observed early and remained stable during the study. CONCLUSIONS: In this controlled trial, stapled transanal rectal resection was well tolerated, was more effective than biofeedback training for the resolution of obstructed defecation symptoms, and improved quality of life, with minimal risk of impaired continence. Thus, stapled transanal rectal resection offers a new treatment alternative for obstructed defecation after failure of conservative measures including biofeedback training, a noninvasive approach.

Rectal diverticulum: a new complication of STARR procedure for obstructed defecation.

We report a case of rectal diverticulum developed after stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) procedure for obstructed defecation. A 21-year-old woman with chronic constipation was diagnosed with a rectocele at defecography. The patient underwent STARR procedure. Six months later, she presented with severe constipation requiring enemas and a worse condition than that preoperatively. Defecography and rectoscopy revealed a rectal wall diverticulum cavity with incomplete elimination of barium enema. The patient underwent transanal diverticulectomy and direct rectal wall repair. STARR procedure can produce new and difficult-to-treat complications and should be reserved for expert colorectal surgeons with proved familiarity in transanal surgery.

Stapled transanal rectal resection for outlet obstruction syndrome: results and follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study was to assess safety, effectiveness, and long-term outcomes of stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) for the cure of outlet obstruction syndrome (OOS). METHODS: Data were collected over a 3-year period (2004-2007), at the Department of Surgery of the University of Genoa, from 25 consecutive subjects (19 of them females) undergoing STARR because of OOS that had not responded to medical treatment,. RESULTS: Preoperatively, patients were submitted to clinical examination, defecography, colonoscopy, manometry, and recto-anal reflexes determination. All patients had mucosal prolapse, 15 rectal intussusception, 15 rectocele. Postoperatively no deaths were observed; one patient had a hemorrhage requiring reintervention. Mean time to resumption of normal activity was 8.5 +/- 4.5 days. Patients were followed for a mean of 24.7 +/- 10.9 months (range: 6-42 months). Late specific complications included 3 cases of urge to defecate, 8 of incontinence to flatus. Functional outcome was positive for 22 patients (excellent in 4 cases, good in 15, fairly good in 3). Six months postoperatively (25 s), patients had improvement of the mean Constipation Score (p = 0.0002), less pain during evacuation (p = 0.0003), and reduced use of digital assistance to defecate (p < 0.0001). Continence Grading Scale and enema use remained stable after intervention. Patients had increase in basal sphincter pressure (p = 0.0078) and maximal squeeze pressure (p = 0.0051). Recto-anal reflex study showed increase in abdominal pain threshold (p < 0.0001); anal sphincter relaxation threshold and desire to defecate threshold did not change. CONCLUSIONS: According to the present study, STARR seemed to be a safe and effective treatment for OOS associated with symptomatic rectocele and intussusception.

Treatment of impaired defecation associated with rectocele by behavorial retraining (biofeedback).

PURPOSE: Large rectoceles have been associated with symptoms of impaired rectal evacuation, often leading to rectocele repair. However, these symptoms, or the anatomic abnormality, may be caused, at least in part, by a primary disturbance of rectoanal coordination. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of biofeedback therapy in such patients. METHODS: Thirty-two female patients (median age, 52 years) complaining of impaired rectal evacuation and with a rectocele greater than 2 cm at proctography were evaluated by structured questionnaire before, immediately after treatment, and at follow-up. Physiologic and proctographic findings were related to outcome. RESULTS: Immediate results were available in 32 patients and medium-term follow-up (median, 10; range, 2-30 months) in 25 patients. At follow-up 14 (56 percent) patients felt a little and 4 (16 percent) patients felt major improvement in symptoms, including 3 (12 percent) with complete symptom relief. Immediately after biofeedback there was a modest reduction in need to strain (from 72 to 50 percent), feeling of incomplete evacuation (from 78 to 59 percent), need to assist defecation digitally (from 84 to 63 percent), and need to use an evacuant (from 47 to 28 percent), and this was maintained at follow-up. Bowel frequency was significantly normalized at follow-up (P = 0.02). Pretreatment presence of symptoms of digitally assisting defecation, pelvic floor incoordination, and proctographic rectocele size and contrast trapping, did not predict outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral therapy, including biofeedback, leads to major symptom relief in a minority, and partial symptom relief in a majority, of patients with a feeling of impaired defecation and the presence of a large rectocele. Residual symptoms are common. Biofeedback may be a reasonable first-line treatment for such patients.

Prognostic significance of rectocele, intussusception, and abnormal perineal descent in biofeedback treatment for constipated patients with paradoxical puborectalis contraction.

PURPOSE: The findings of paradoxical puborectalis contraction, rectocele, sigmoidocele, intussusception, and abnormal perineal descent often coexist in constipated patients, as noted by defecographic study. Moreover, some of these conditions are often found in asymptomatic patients. Biofeedback is the treatment of choice for constipated patients with paradoxical puborectalis contraction; the main determinant of successful biofeedback is patient compliance. The significance of coexistent and highly prevalent variants, such as rectocele, intussusception, sigmoidocele, or abnormal perineal descent, on the success of biofeedback is unknown. This review was designed to assess whether these coexisting defecographic findings have any prognostic significance for the outcome of biofeedback. METHODS: From July 1988 to December 1996, 209 constipated patients with paradoxical puborectalis contraction underwent biofeedback treatment after defecography. A total of 173 patients (120 females) who had more than one biofeedback session after defecography formed the study group. Defecographic findings included concomitant rectoceles, 40 (23 percent); evidence of circumferential intussusception, 17 (10 percent); sigmoidocele, 13 (8 percent); and abnormal perineal descent, 109 (63 percent). RESULTS: Whereas 65 patients failed to complete the course of biofeedback therapy, 108 (62.4 percent) patients completed the course of biofeedback and were discharged by the therapist. Within the completed group 59 (55 percent) improved, and 49 (45 percent) patients failed biofeedback therapy. In the improved group 14 (23.7 percent) had a rectocele, 5 (8.5 percent) had intussusception, 5 (8.5 percent) had a sigmoidocele, and 37 (62.7 percent) had abnormal perineal descent. In the failure group 9 (18.4 percent) had a rectocele, 5 (10.2 percent) had an intussusception, 2 (4.1 percent) had a sigmoidocele, and 31 (63.3 percent) had abnormal perineal descent (P = not significant). The success of biofeedback was then analyzed relative to the number of coexisting conditions. Specifically, the outcome in patients with paradoxical puborectalis contraction alone and with one, two, and three other defecographic findings were compared. No statistically significant difference was found among these four groups. CONCLUSION: Although other defecographic findings frequently coexist with paradoxical puborectalis contraction, none of the concomitant findings adversely affected the outcome of biofeedback treatment. Therefore, biofeedback can be recommended to patients with coexistent defecographic findings, with expectation of success in over 50 percent of individuals who complete the course of therapy.