Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 9/2021

01-09-2021 | Rectal Prolapse | Original Article

Postoperative complications and recurrence rates after rectal prolapse surgery versus combined rectal prolapse and pelvic organ prolapse surgery

Authors: Shannon L. Wallace, Ekene A. Enemchukwu, Kavita Mishra, Leila Neshatian, Bertha Chen, Lisa Rogo-Gupta, Eric R. Sokol, Brooke H. Gurland

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 9/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Our primary objectives were to compare < 30-day postoperative complications and RP recurrence rates after RP-only surgery and combined surgery. Our secondary objectives were to determine preoperative predictors of < 30-day complications and RP recurrence.

Methods

A prospective IRB-approved cohort study was performed at a single tertiary care center from 2017 to 2020. Female patients with symptomatic RP underwent either RP-only surgery or combined surgery based on the discretion of the colorectal and FPMRS surgeons. Primary outcome measures were < 30-day complications separated into Clavien-Dindo (CD) classes and rectal prolapse on physical examination.

Results

Seventy women had RP-only surgery and 45 had combined surgery with a mean follow-up time of 208 days. Sixty-eight percent underwent abdominal RP repair, and 32% underwent perineal RP repair. Twenty percent had one or more complications, 14% in the RP-only group and 29% in the combined surgery group (p = 0.06). On multivariate analysis, combined surgery patients had a 30% increased risk of complications compared to RP-only surgery patients (RR = 1.3). Most of these complications were minor (14/17, 82.4%) and categorized as CD I or II, including urinary retention and UTI. Twelve percent of this cohort had RP recurrence, 11% in the RP-only group and 13% in the combined surgery group (p = 0.76). Preoperative risk factors for RP recurrence included a primary complaint of rectal bleeding (RR 5.5) and reporting stools consistent with Bristol Stool Scale of 1 (RR 2.1).

Conclusion

Patients undergoing combined RP + POP surgery had a higher risk of complications and equivalent RP recurrence rates compared to patients undergoing RP-only surgery.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bordeianou L, et al. Rectal prolapse: an overview of clinical features, diagnosis, and patient-specific management strategies. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18(5):1059–69.CrossRef Bordeianou L, et al. Rectal prolapse: an overview of clinical features, diagnosis, and patient-specific management strategies. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18(5):1059–69.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Altman D, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence in women with surgically managed rectal prolapse: a population-based case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49(1):28–35.CrossRef Altman D, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence in women with surgically managed rectal prolapse: a population-based case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49(1):28–35.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Nygaard I, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA. 2008;300(11):1311–6.CrossRef Nygaard I, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA. 2008;300(11):1311–6.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Naldini G, et al. Complex pelvic organ prolapse: decision-making algorithm. Int J Color Dis. 2019;34(1):189–92.CrossRef Naldini G, et al. Complex pelvic organ prolapse: decision-making algorithm. Int J Color Dis. 2019;34(1):189–92.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Geltzeiler CB, et al. Combined rectopexy and sacrocolpopexy is safe for correction of pelvic organ prolapse. Int J Color Dis. 2018;33(10):1453–9.CrossRef Geltzeiler CB, et al. Combined rectopexy and sacrocolpopexy is safe for correction of pelvic organ prolapse. Int J Color Dis. 2018;33(10):1453–9.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Tou S, Brown SR, Nelson RL. Surgery for complete (full-thickness) rectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;11:CD001758. Tou S, Brown SR, Nelson RL. Surgery for complete (full-thickness) rectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;11:CD001758.
7.
go back to reference Maher C, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD004014. Maher C, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD004014.
8.
go back to reference Siddiqui NY, et al. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):44–55.CrossRef Siddiqui NY, et al. Mesh sacrocolpopexy compared with native tissue vaginal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):44–55.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Lim M, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in females: functional outcome of mesh sacrocolpopexy and rectopexy as a combined procedure. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50(9):1412–21.CrossRef Lim M, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in females: functional outcome of mesh sacrocolpopexy and rectopexy as a combined procedure. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50(9):1412–21.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference van Zanten F, et al. Long-term anatomical and functional results of robot-assisted pelvic floor surgery for the management of multicompartment prolapse: a prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2020. van Zanten F, et al. Long-term anatomical and functional results of robot-assisted pelvic floor surgery for the management of multicompartment prolapse: a prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2020.
11.
go back to reference Dindo D, et al. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.CrossRef Dindo D, et al. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Unger CA, et al. Perioperative adverse events after minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:547:e1–8.CrossRef Unger CA, et al. Perioperative adverse events after minimally invasive abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:547:e1–8.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference van Iersel JJ, et al. Robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy for multicompartment prolapse of the pelvic floor: a prospective cohort study evaluating functional and sexual outcome. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(10):968–74.CrossRef van Iersel JJ, et al. Robot-assisted sacrocolporectopexy for multicompartment prolapse of the pelvic floor: a prospective cohort study evaluating functional and sexual outcome. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(10):968–74.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Campagna G, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy plus ventral rectopexy as combined treatment for multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse. Tech Coloproctol. 2020;24(6):573–84.CrossRef Campagna G, et al. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy plus ventral rectopexy as combined treatment for multicompartment pelvic organ prolapse. Tech Coloproctol. 2020;24(6):573–84.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Weinberg D, et al. Safety of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with concurrent rectopexy: peri-operative morbidity in a nationwide cohort. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(3):385–92.CrossRef Weinberg D, et al. Safety of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with concurrent rectopexy: peri-operative morbidity in a nationwide cohort. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(3):385–92.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Reddy J, et al. Robotic sacrocolpoperineopexy with ventral rectopexy for the combined treatment of rectal and pelvic organ prolapse: initial report and technique. J Robot Surg. 2011;5(3):167–73.CrossRef Reddy J, et al. Robotic sacrocolpoperineopexy with ventral rectopexy for the combined treatment of rectal and pelvic organ prolapse: initial report and technique. J Robot Surg. 2011;5(3):167–73.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Jallad K, et al. The effect of surgical start time in patients undergoing minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(10):1535–9.CrossRef Jallad K, et al. The effect of surgical start time in patients undergoing minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(10):1535–9.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Ayav A, et al. Surgical management of combined rectal and genital prolapse in young patients: transabdominal approach. Int J Color Dis. 2005;20(2):173–9.CrossRef Ayav A, et al. Surgical management of combined rectal and genital prolapse in young patients: transabdominal approach. Int J Color Dis. 2005;20(2):173–9.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Collopy BT, et al. Abdominal colporectopexy with pelvic cul-de-sac closure. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45(4):522–9.CrossRef Collopy BT, et al. Abdominal colporectopexy with pelvic cul-de-sac closure. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45(4):522–9.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kiyasu Y, et al. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy with sacrocolpopexy for coexisting pelvic organ prolapse and external rectal prolapse. J Anus Rectum Colon. 2018;1(4):141–6.CrossRef Kiyasu Y, et al. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy with sacrocolpopexy for coexisting pelvic organ prolapse and external rectal prolapse. J Anus Rectum Colon. 2018;1(4):141–6.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Popp L, et al. Pelvic floor-lifting: an interdisciplinary repair of combined rectal and vaginal prolapse-5 years’ experience. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;288(1):83–90.CrossRef Popp L, et al. Pelvic floor-lifting: an interdisciplinary repair of combined rectal and vaginal prolapse-5 years’ experience. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;288(1):83–90.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Riansuwan W, et al. Combined surgery in pelvic organ prolapse is safe and effective. Color Dis. 2010;12(3):188–92.CrossRef Riansuwan W, et al. Combined surgery in pelvic organ prolapse is safe and effective. Color Dis. 2010;12(3):188–92.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Sagar PM, et al. Feasibility and functional outcome of laparoscopic sacrocolporectopexy for combined vaginal and rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51(9):1414–20.CrossRef Sagar PM, et al. Feasibility and functional outcome of laparoscopic sacrocolporectopexy for combined vaginal and rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51(9):1414–20.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Slawik S, et al. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy, posterior colporrhaphy and vaginal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of recto-genital prolapse and mechanical outlet obstruction. Color Dis. 2008;10(2):138–43. Slawik S, et al. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy, posterior colporrhaphy and vaginal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of recto-genital prolapse and mechanical outlet obstruction. Color Dis. 2008;10(2):138–43.
25.
go back to reference Wallace SL, et al. Surgical approach, complications, and reoperation rates of combined rectal and pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(10):2101–8.CrossRef Wallace SL, et al. Surgical approach, complications, and reoperation rates of combined rectal and pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2020;31(10):2101–8.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Watadani Y, et al. Sacrocolpopexy with rectopexy for pelvic floor prolapse improves bowel function and quality of life. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56(12):1415–22.CrossRef Watadani Y, et al. Sacrocolpopexy with rectopexy for pelvic floor prolapse improves bowel function and quality of life. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56(12):1415–22.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Yang SJ, et al. Laparoscopic vaginal suspension and rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Ann Coloproctol. 2017;33(2):64–9.CrossRef Yang SJ, et al. Laparoscopic vaginal suspension and rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Ann Coloproctol. 2017;33(2):64–9.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Speed, J.M., et al., Trends in the Diagnosis and Management of Combined Rectal and Vaginal Pelvic Organ Prolapse. [published online ahead of print, 2020 May 19] Urology. 2020. Speed, J.M., et al., Trends in the Diagnosis and Management of Combined Rectal and Vaginal Pelvic Organ Prolapse. [published online ahead of print, 2020 May 19] Urology. 2020.
Metadata
Title
Postoperative complications and recurrence rates after rectal prolapse surgery versus combined rectal prolapse and pelvic organ prolapse surgery
Authors
Shannon L. Wallace
Ekene A. Enemchukwu
Kavita Mishra
Leila Neshatian
Bertha Chen
Lisa Rogo-Gupta
Eric R. Sokol
Brooke H. Gurland
Publication date
01-09-2021
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 9/2021
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-021-04778-y

Other articles of this Issue 9/2021

International Urogynecology Journal 9/2021 Go to the issue