Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Surgery
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 11/2010

01-11-2010

Abdominal Resection Rectopexy with an Absorbable Polyglactin Mesh: Prospective Evaluation of Morphological and Functional Changes with Consecutive Improvement of Patient’s Symptoms

Authors: S. D. Otto, J. P. Ritz, J. Gröne, H. J. Buhr, A. J. Kroesen

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 11/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The pathophysiology of rectal prolapse and intussusception has not yet been clarified. This is reflected in the multiplicity of surgical procedures. The aim of this prospective study was to measure morphological and functional changes of the pelvic floor and the rectum before and after resection rectopexy.

Methods

A total of 21 patients (mean age 60 years; 2 men, 19 women) with manifest rectal prolapse and rectoanal intussusception underwent sigmoidectomy and rectopexy with an absorbable polyglactin mesh graft. The following analyses were performed preoperatively and, on average, 15 months (range 6–21 month) postoperatively: radiologic defecography, rectal volumetry, sphincter manometry, and evaluation of clinical symptoms.

Results

Postoperatively there was no patient with rectal prolapse, and only one with an intussusception. Rectal compliance increased from 6.4 to 10.2 ml/mmHg. Rectal volumetry showed a decrease of the thresholds for the sensation of “desire to defecate” and “maximal tolerated volume” (100–75 ml, 175–150 ml). Postoperatively, there was a higher level of the pelvic floor during contraction. The anorectal angle, vector volume, radial asymmetry, sphincter length, and resting and squeezing pressures were unchanged. Surgery improved rectal evacuation (p = 0.03), continence (p = 0.01), stool consistency (p = 0.03), and warning period (p = 0.01). Patients’ personal assessment showed an improved overall satisfaction.

Conclusions

Resection rectopexy is a reliable method for treating rectal prolapse and rectoanal intussusception with clear improvement of the patient’s clinical symptoms. The restored anorectal function can be attributed to improved rectal compliance, a lower sensory threshold, an elevation of the pelvic floor during squeezing, and an improved rectal evacuation.
Literature
1.
Dvorkin LS, Knowles CH, Scott SM et al (2005) Rectal intussusception: characterization of symptomatology. Dis Colon Rectum 48:824–831CrossRefPubMed
2.
Keighley MR, Shouler P (1984) Clinical and manometric features of the solitary rectal ulcer syndrome. Dis Colon Rectum 27:507–512CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
5.
Boccasanta P, Venturi M, Roviaro G (2007) Stapled transanal rectal resection versus stapled anopexy in the cure of hemorrhoids associated with rectal prolapse. A randomized controlled trial. Int J Colorectal Dis 22:245–251CrossRefPubMed
6.
Von Papen M, Ashari LH, Lumley JW et al (2007) Functional results of laparoscopic resection rectopexy for symptomatic rectal intussusception. Dis Colon Rectum 50:50–55CrossRef
7.
Marderstein EL, Delaney CP (2007) Surgical management of rectal prolapse. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 4:552–561CrossRefPubMed
8.
Gagliardi G, Pescatori M, Altomare DF et al (2008) Results, outcome predictors, and complications after stapled transanal rectal resection for obstructed defecation. Dis Colon Rectum 51:186–195CrossRefPubMed
9.
10.
11.
Moschowitz AV (1912) Pathogenesis, anatomy and cure of prolapse of the rectum. Surg Gynecol Obstet 15:7–21
12.
Porter NH (1962) A physiological study of the pelvic floor in rectal prolapse. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 31:379–404PubMed
13.
Abendstein B, Petros PE, Richardson PA et al (2007) The surgical anatomy of rectocele and anterior rectal wall intussusception. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19:705–710PubMed
14.
Kroesen AJ, Runkel N, Buhr HJ (1999) Manometric analysis of anal sphincter damage after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Int J Colorectal Dis 14:114–118CrossRefPubMed
15.
Stadelmaier U, Bittorf B, Meyer M et al (2000) Can continence function after rectal resection be prognostically estimated? Chirurg 71:932–938CrossRefPubMed
16.
Herman RM, Richter P, Walega P et al (2001) Anorectal sphincter function and rectal barostat study in patients following transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 16:370–376CrossRefPubMed
17.
Agachan F, Reissman P, Pfeifer J et al (1997) Comparison of three perineal procedures for the treatment of rectal prolapse. South Med J 90:925–932PubMed
18.
Delemarre JB, Gooszen HG, Kruyt RH et al (1991) The effect of posterior rectopexy on fecal continence. A prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum 34:311–316CrossRefPubMed
19.
Renzi A, Izzo D, Di Sarno G et al (2006) Cinedefecographic findings in patients with obstructed defecation syndrome. A study in 420 cases. Minerva Chir 61:493–499PubMed
20.
Dobben AC, Wiersma TG, Janssen LW et al (2005) Prospective assessment of interobserver agreement for defecography in fecal incontinence. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:1166–1172CrossRefPubMed
21.
Rao SS, Sun WM (1997) Current techniques of assessing defecation dynamics. Dig Dis 15(Suppl 1):64–77CrossRefPubMed
22.
Barthet M, Bellon P, Abou E et al (2002) Anal endosonography for assessment of anal incontinence with a linear probe: relationships with clinical and manometric features. Int J Colorectal Dis 17:123–128CrossRefPubMed
23.
Parks AG, Swash M, Urich H (1977) Sphincter denervation in anorectal incontinence and rectal prolapse. Gut 18:656–665CrossRefPubMed
24.
Piloni V, Fioravanti P, Spazzafumo L et al (1999) Measurement of the anorectal angle by defecography for the diagnosis of fecal incontinence. Int J Colorectal Dis 14:131–135CrossRefPubMed
25.
Tsiaoussis J, Chrysos E, Athanasakis E et al (2005) Rectoanal intussusception: presentation of the disorder and late results of resection rectopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 48:838–844CrossRefPubMed
26.
Johansson C, Ihre T, Ahlback SO (1985) Disturbances in the defecation mechanism with special reference to intussusception of the rectum (internal procidentia). Dis Colon Rectum 28:920–924CrossRefPubMed
27.
Thompson JR, Chen AH, Pettit PD et al (2002) Incidence of occult rectal prolapse in patients with clinical rectoceles and defecatory dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 187:1494–1499 (discussion 1499–1500)CrossRefPubMed
28.
Silvis R, Gooszen HG, van Essen A et al (1999) Abdominal rectovaginopexy: modified technique to treat constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 42:82–88CrossRefPubMed
29.
Tjandra JJ, Fazio VW, Church JM et al (1993) Ripstein procedure is an effective treatment for rectal prolapse without constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 36:501–507CrossRefPubMed
30.
D’Hoore A, Penninckx F (2006) Laparoscopic ventral recto(colpo)pexy for rectal prolapse: surgical technique and outcome for 109 patients. Surg Endosc 20:1919–1923CrossRefPubMed
31.
Dulucq JL, Wintringer P, Mahajna A (2007) Clinical and functional outcome of laparoscopic posterior rectopexy (Wells) for full-thickness rectal prolapse. A prospective study. Surg Endosc 21:2226–2230CrossRefPubMed
32.
Schultz I, Mellgren A, Dolk A et al (2000) Long-term results and functional outcome after Ripstein rectopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 43:35–43CrossRefPubMed
33.
Lechaux D, Trebuchet G, Siproudhis L et al (2005) Laparoscopic rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse: a single-institution retrospective study evaluating surgical outcome. Surg Endosc 19:514–518CrossRefPubMed
34.
Rose J, Schneider C, Scheidbach H et al (2002) Laparoscopic treatment of rectal prolapse: experience gained in a prospective multicenter study. Langenbecks Arch Surg 387:130–137CrossRefPubMed
35.
Johnson E, Stangeland A, Johannessen HO et al (2007) Resection rectopexy for external rectal prolapse reduces constipation and anal incontinence. Scand J Surg 96:56–61PubMed
Metadata
Title
Abdominal Resection Rectopexy with an Absorbable Polyglactin Mesh: Prospective Evaluation of Morphological and Functional Changes with Consecutive Improvement of Patient’s Symptoms
Authors
S. D. Otto
J. P. Ritz
J. Gröne
H. J. Buhr
A. J. Kroesen
Publication date
01-11-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 11/2010
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010-0735-6

Other articles of this Issue 11/2010

World Journal of Surgery 11/2010 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Vascular Reconstruction During Pancreatoduodenectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreas Improves Resectability but does not Achieve Cure

EditorialNotes

Improving Surgical Services in Developing Nations: Getting to Go

OriginalPaper

Molecular Testing for Somatic Mutations Improves the Accuracy of Thyroid Fine-needle Aspiration Biopsy

OriginalPaper

Increased Platelet Counts after Transthoracic En Bloc Resection for Esophageal Cancer is Associated with Significantly Improved Survival

ReviewPaper

Systematic Review of the Use of a Mesh to Prevent Parastomal Hernia

OriginalPaper

Histological and Immediate Postoperative Outcome after Preoperative Cetuximab: Case-Matched Control Study