Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 6/2004

01-06-2004 | Original Contribution

Outcome After Transperineal Mesh Repair of Rectocele: A Case Series

Authors: M. A. Mercer-Jones, F.R.C.S., A. Sprowson, M.R.C.S., J. S. Varma, M.D.

Published in: Diseases of the Colon & Rectum | Issue 6/2004

Login to get access

PURPOSE:

This study was designed to establish the safety and efficacy of transperineal mesh repair in patients with obstructed defecation caused by rectocele.

METHODS:

Between 1998 and 2002, 24 consecutive females with symptomatic rectocele were retrospectively reviewed after mesh repair of rectocele. Two patients had inadvertent rectal perforation during operation and had no mesh implantation. Of the remaining 22 patients, 14 had a prolene mesh implanted, and 8 had a Vipro II mesh implanted. Median age at the time of presentation was 55 (range, 28–66) years. Patients were selected for operation based on clinical and evacuation proctogram findings. All patients complained of incomplete rectal evacuation, and the majority complained of excessive straining, constipation, and the need for vaginal/perineal digital pressure to aid defecation. Patients were followed up in clinic at six weeks, and a telephone questionnaire was performed at a median time of 12.5 (range, 3–47) months. Functional/objective outcomes were assessed for the following five symptoms preoperatively and postoperatively: excessive straining, incomplete evacuation, perineal/vaginal digital pressure, vaginal bulging, and constipation (always, usually, occasionally, never). Subjective outcomes were assessed as excellent, good, moderate, or poor. In addition, patients were asked about preexisting and postoperative dyspareunia.

RESULTS:

Objective outcomes based on symptoms showed an improvement in two or more symptoms in 20 patients (91 percent). For all symptoms, there was a significant reduction in mean values after repair. Subjective outcomes showed that 17 patients (77 percent) had a moderate/good/excellent result. Patients with abnormal preoperative colonic transit marker studies did as well as those who had no transit studies performed or those who had normal studies. Patients who did not vaginally digitate did as well as those who did not digitate. Only one patient complained of new onset dyspareunia. Two patients with sphincter defects on endoanal ultrasound had a sphincteroplasty performed (1 prerectocele repair and 1 at the same time). There were two superficial wound infections and one deep infection. All infections responded to antibiotic therapy. No mesh has been removed. Semiabsorbable mesh repair was superior to nonabsorbable mesh repair.

CONCLUSIONS:

Transperineal mesh repair of symptomatic rectocele is a safe technique that avoids the anal dilation and sphincter injury associated with endorectal repair. Objective and subjective results are good in the majority of patients, although a longer follow-up is required to confirm no deterioration.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Richardson, AC 1993The rectovaginal septum revisisted: its relationship to rectocele and its importance in rectocele repairClin Obstet Gynecol367683 Richardson, AC 1993The rectovaginal septum revisisted: its relationship to rectocele and its importance in rectocele repairClin Obstet Gynecol367683
2.
go back to reference Greenberg, T, Kelvin, FM, Maglinte, DD 2001Barium trapping in rectoceles: are we trapped by the wrong definitionAbdom Imaging2658790 Greenberg, T, Kelvin, FM, Maglinte, DD 2001Barium trapping in rectoceles: are we trapped by the wrong definitionAbdom Imaging2658790
3.
go back to reference Watson, SJ, Loder, PB, Halligan, S, Bartram, CI, Kamm, MA, Phillips, RK 1996Transperineal repair of symptomatic rectocele with marlex mesh: a clinical, physiological and radiological assessment of treatmentJ Am Coll Surg18325761 Watson, SJ, Loder, PB, Halligan, S, Bartram, CI, Kamm, MA, Phillips, RK 1996Transperineal repair of symptomatic rectocele with marlex mesh: a clinical, physiological and radiological assessment of treatmentJ Am Coll Surg18325761
4.
go back to reference Tjandra, JJ, Ooi, BS, Tang, CL, Dwyer, P, Carey, M 1999Transanal repair of rectocele corrects obstructed defecation if it is not associated with anismusDis Colon Rectum42154450 Tjandra, JJ, Ooi, BS, Tang, CL, Dwyer, P, Carey, M 1999Transanal repair of rectocele corrects obstructed defecation if it is not associated with anismusDis Colon Rectum42154450
5.
go back to reference Mellgren, A, Anzen, B, Nilsson, BY, et al. 1995Results of rectocele repair: a prospective studyDis Colon Rectum38713 Mellgren, A, Anzen, B, Nilsson, BY,  et al. 1995Results of rectocele repair: a prospective studyDis Colon Rectum38713
6.
go back to reference Dam, JH, Schouten, WR, Ginai, AZ, Huisman, WM, Hop, WC 1996The impact of anismus on the clinical outcome of rectocele repairInt J Colorectal Dis1123842 Dam, JH, Schouten, WR, Ginai, AZ, Huisman, WM, Hop, WC 1996The impact of anismus on the clinical outcome of rectocele repairInt J Colorectal Dis1123842
7.
go back to reference Ho, YH, Ang, M, Nyam, D, Tan, M, Seow-Choen, F 1998Transanal approach to rectocele repair may compromise anal sphincter pressuresDis Colon Rectum413548 Ho, YH, Ang, M, Nyam, D, Tan, M, Seow-Choen, F 1998Transanal approach to rectocele repair may compromise anal sphincter pressuresDis Colon Rectum413548
8.
go back to reference Kahn, MA, Stanton, SL 1997Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual functionBr J Obstet Gynaecol104826 Kahn, MA, Stanton, SL 1997Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual functionBr J Obstet Gynaecol104826
9.
go back to reference Dam, JH, Huisman, WM, Hop, WC, Schouten, WR 2000Fecal continence after rectocele repair: a prospective studyInt J Colorecal Dis15547 Dam, JH, Huisman, WM, Hop, WC, Schouten, WR 2000Fecal continence after rectocele repair: a prospective studyInt J Colorecal Dis15547
10.
go back to reference Khubchandani, IT, Clancey, JP,3rd, Rosen, L, Riether, RD, Stasik, JJ,Jr 1997Endorectal repair of rectocele revisitedBr J Surg848991 Khubchandani, IT, Clancey, JP,3rd, Rosen, L, Riether, RD, Stasik, JJ,Jr 1997Endorectal repair of rectocele revisitedBr J Surg848991
11.
go back to reference Karlbom, U, Graf, W, Nilsson, S, Pahlman, L 1996Does surgical repair of a rectocele improve rectal emptyingDis Colon Rectum391296302 Karlbom, U, Graf, W, Nilsson, S, Pahlman, L 1996Does surgical repair of a rectocele improve rectal emptyingDis Colon Rectum391296302
12.
go back to reference Johansson, C, Nilsson, BY, Holmstrom, B, Dolk, A, Mellgren, A 1992Association between rectocele and paradoxical sphincter responseDis Colon Rectum355039 Johansson, C, Nilsson, BY, Holmstrom, B, Dolk, A, Mellgren, A 1992Association between rectocele and paradoxical sphincter responseDis Colon Rectum355039
13.
go back to reference Halligran, S, Bartram, CJ, Park, HJ, Kamm, MA 1995Proctographic features of anismusRadiology19767982 Halligran, S, Bartram, CJ, Park, HJ, Kamm, MA 1995Proctographic features of anismusRadiology19767982
Metadata
Title
Outcome After Transperineal Mesh Repair of Rectocele: A Case Series
Authors
M. A. Mercer-Jones, F.R.C.S.
A. Sprowson, M.R.C.S.
J. S. Varma, M.D.
Publication date
01-06-2004
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum / Issue 6/2004
Print ISSN: 0012-3706
Electronic ISSN: 1530-0358
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-0526-y

Other articles of this Issue 6/2004

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 6/2004 Go to the issue