Top

Techniques in Coloproctology

Published in:

Open Access 01-03-2021 | Rectal Prolapse | Original Article

Redo ventral rectopexy: is it worthwhile?

Authors: K. E. Laitakari, J. K. Mäkelä-Kaikkonen, M. Kairaluoma, A. Junttila, J. Kössi, P. Ohtonen, T. T. Rautio

Published in: Techniques in Coloproctology | Issue 3/2021

Abstract

Background

Minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is a widely used surgical treatment for posterior pelvic organ prolapse; however, evidence of the utility of revisional surgery is lacking. Our aim was to assess the technical details, safety and outcomes of redo minimally invasive VMR for patients with external rectal prolapse (ERP) recurrence or relapsed symptoms of internal rectal prolapse (IRP).

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with recurrent ERP or symptomatic IRP who underwent redo minimally invasive VMR between 2011 and 2016. The study was conducted at three hospitals in Finland. Data collected retrospectively included patient demographics, in addition to perioperative and short-term postoperative findings. At follow-up, all living patients were sent a questionnaire concerning postoperative disease-related symptoms and quality of life.

Results

A total of 43 redo minimally invasive VMR were performed during the study period. The indication for reoperation was recurrent ERP in 22 patients and relapsed symptoms of IRP in 21 patients. In most operations (62.8%), the previously used mesh was left in situ and a new one was placed. Ten (23.3%) patients experienced complications, including 2 (4.7%) mesh-related complications. The recurrence rate was 4.5% for ERP. Three patients out of 43 were reoperated on for various reasons. One patient required postoperative laparoscopic hematoma evacuation. Patients operated on for recurrent ERP seemed to benefit more from the reoperation.

Conclusions

Minimally invasive redo VMR appears to be a safe and effective procedure for treating posterior pelvic floor dysfunction with acceptable recurrence and reoperation rates.

Tou S, Brown SR, Nelson RL (2015) Surgery for complete (full-thickness) rectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 11:CD001758. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001758.pub3

Faucheron JL, Trilling B, Girard E, Sage PY, Barbois S, Reche F (2015) Anterior rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse: technical and functional results. World J Gastroenterol 21:5049–5055. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i16.5049CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lundby L, Laurberg S (2015) Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for obstructed defaecation syndrome: time for a critical appraisal. Colorectal Dis 17:102–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12830CrossRefPubMed

Boons P, Collinson R, Cunningham C, Lindsey I (2010) Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse improves constipation and avoids de novo constipation. Colorectal Dis 12:526–532. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.01859.xCrossRefPubMed

Rickert A, Kienle P (2015) Laparoscopic surgery for rectal prolapse and pelvic floor disorders. World J Gastrointest Endosc 7:1045–1054. https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v7.i12.1045CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mäkelä-Kaikkonen J, Rautio T, Klintrup K, Takala H, Vierimaa M, Ohtonen P, Mäkelä J (2014) Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic ventral rectopexy in the treatment of rectal prolapse: a matched-pairs study of operative details and complications. Tech Coloproctol 18:151–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-013-1042-7CrossRefPubMed

van Iersel JJ, Paulides TJC, Verheijen PM, Lumley JW, Broeders IA, Consten EC (2016) Current status of laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for external and internal rectal prolapse. World J Gastroenterol 22:4977–4987. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i21.4977CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Albayati S, Chen P, Morgan MJ, Toh JWT (2019) Robotic vs. laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for external rectal prolapse and rectal intussusception: a systematic review. Tech Coloproctol 23:529–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-019-02014-wCrossRefPubMed

Emile SH, Elfeki H, Shalaby M, Sakr A, Sileri P, Wexner SD (2019) Outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for full-thickness external rectal prolapse: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of the predictors for recurrence. Surg Endosc 33:2444–2455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06803-0CrossRefPubMed

10.

Postillon A, Perrenot C, Germain A, Scherrer ML, Buisset C, Brunaud L, Ayav A, Bresler L (2020) Long-term outcomes of robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for external rectal prolapse. Surg Endosc 34:930–939. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06851-6CrossRefPubMed

11.

Fu CW, Stevenson AR (2017) Risk factors for recurrence after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 60:178–186. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000710CrossRefPubMed

12.

Smyth E, Sileri P, Jones O, Cunningham C, Urban J, Lindsey I (2012) Patients with benign joint hypermobility and rectal prolapse: a complex subgroup of patients. Colorectal Dis 14(Suppl. 1):35

13.

Hotouras A, Ribas Y, Zakeri S, Bhan C, Wexner SD, Chan CL, Murphy J (2015) A systematic review of the literature on the surgical management of recurrent rectal prolapse. Colorectal Dis 17:657–664. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12946CrossRefPubMed

14.

Mercer-Jones MA, D’Hoore A, Dixon AR, Lehur P, Lindsey I, Mellgren A, Stevenson AR (2014) Consensus on ventral rectopexy: report of a panel of experts. Colorectal Dis 16:82–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12415CrossRefPubMed

15.

Gurland B, e Carvalho MEC, Ridgeway B, Paraiso MFR, Hull T, Zutshi M (2017) Should we offer ventral rectopexy to patients with recurrent external rectal prolapse? Int J Colorectal Dis 32:1561–1567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-017-2858-9CrossRefPubMed

16.

Brunner M, Roth H, Günther K, Grützmann R, Matzel KE (2019) Ventral rectopexy with biological mesh for recurrent disorders of the posterior pelvic organ compartment. Int J Colorectal Dis 34:1763–1769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-019-03363-6CrossRefPubMed

17.

Jorge JMN, Wexner SD (1993) Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36:77–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02050307CrossRefPubMed

18.

Altomare DF, Spazzafumo L, Rinaldi M, Dodi G, Ghiselli R, Piloni V (2008) Set-up and statistical validation of a new scoring system for obstructed defaecation syndrome. Colorectal Dis 10:84–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01262.xCrossRefPubMed

19.

D’Hoore A, Penninckx F (2006) Laparoscopic ventral recto(colpo)pexy for rectal prolapse: surgical technique and outcome for 109 patients. Surg Endosc 20:1919–1923. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-005-0485-yCrossRefPubMed

20.

Consten EC, van Iersel JJ, Verheijen PM, Broeders IA, Wolthuis AM, D’Hoore A (2015) Long-term outcome after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: an observational study of 919 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 262:742–748. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001401CrossRefPubMed

21.

Evans C, Stevenson AR, Sileri P, Mercer-Jones MA, Dixon AR, Cunningham C, Jones OM, Lindsey I (2015) A multicenter collaboration to assess the safety of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 58:799–807. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000402CrossRefPubMed

22.

Randall J, Smyth E, McCarthy K, Dixon AR (2014) Outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for external rectal prolapse. Colorectal Dis 16:914–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12741CrossRefPubMed

Title: Redo ventral rectopexy: is it worthwhile?
Authors: K. E. Laitakari
J. K. Mäkelä-Kaikkonen
M. Kairaluoma
A. Junttila
J. Kössi
P. Ohtonen
T. T. Rautio
Publication date: 01-03-2021
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Keywords: Rectal Prolapse
Rectopexy
Published in: Techniques in Coloproctology / Issue 3/2021
Print ISSN: 1123-6337
Electronic ISSN: 1128-045X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02369-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Redo ventral rectopexy: is it worthwhile?

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2021

Magnetic resonance imaging template to standardize reporting of anal fistulas

Metastasis to lymph nodes around the vascular tie worsens long-term oncological outcomes following complete mesocolic excision and conventional colectomy for right-sided colon cancer

Major colorectal resection is feasible using a new robotic surgical platform: the first report of a case series

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy affects postoperative outcomes and functional results in patients treated with transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal neoplasms

Cure of enuresis/bowel dysfunction in children may provide insights for adult dysfunctions

Longstanding ‘outlet challenge’