Top

Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery

Published in:

01-12-2024 | Rectopexy | Research

Ventral mesh rectopexy. Does a descending perineum impact functional results and quality of life?

Authors: Ali Al-Nejar, Sylvie Van den Broeck, Quinten Smets, Philip Plaeke, Maarten Spinhoven, Guy Hubens, Niels Komen

Published in: Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Purpose

The impact of perineal descent (PD) on functional outcome and quality of life after ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is unknown. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of PD on the functional outcome and quality of life (QOL) after VMR.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on fifty-five patients who underwent robotic VMR between 2018 and 2021. Pre and postoperative data along with radiological studies were gathered from a prospectively maintained database. The Cleveland Clinic Constipation score (CCCS), the Rome IV criteria and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), were used to measure functional results and QOL.

Results

All 55 patients (mean age 57.8 years) were female. Most patients had radiological findings of severe PD (n = 31) as opposed to mild/moderate PD (n = 24). CCCS significantly improved at 3 months and 1 year post-VMR (mean difference = -4.4 and -5.4 respectively, p < 0.001) with no significant difference between the two groups. The percentage of functional constipation Rome IV criteria only showed an improved outcome at 3 months for severe PD and at 1 year for mild/moderate PD (difference = -58.1% and -54.2% respectively, p < 0.05). Only the SF-36 subscale bodily pain significantly improved in the mild/moderate PD group (mean difference = 16.7, p = 0.002) 3 months post-VMR which subsided after one year (mean difference = 5.5, p = 0.068).

Conclusion

Severe PD may impact the functional outcome of constipation without an evident effect on QOL after VMR. The results, however, remain inconclusive and further research is warranted.

Makela-Kaikkonen J, Rautio T, Ohinmaa A, Koivurova S, Ohtonen P, Sintonen H, Makela J (2019) Cost-analysis and quality of life after laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for posterior compartment prolapse: A randomized trial. Tech Coloproctol 23(5):461–470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-019-01991-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Samaranayake CB, Luo C, Plank AW, Merrie AE, Plank LD, Bissett IP (2010) Systematic review on ventral rectopexy for rectal prolapse and intussusception. Colorectal Dis 12(6):504–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.01934.xCrossRefPubMed

Emile SH, Elfeki HA, Youssef M, Farid M, Wexner SD (2017) Abdominal rectopexy for the treatment of internal rectal prolapse: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 19(1):O13–O24. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13574CrossRefPubMed

D’Hoore A, Cadoni R, Penninckx F (2004) Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 91(11):1500–1505. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4779CrossRefPubMed

Mantoo S, Podevin J, Regenet N, Rigaud J, Lehur PA, Meurette G (2013) Is robotic-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy superior to laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy in the management of obstructed defaecation? Colorectal Dis 15(8):e469–e475. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12251CrossRefPubMed

Laitakari KE, Makela-Kaikkonen JK, Kossi J, Kairaluoma M, Koivurova S, Pollari L, Ohtonen P, Rautio TT (2022) Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: Multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses. Tech Coloproctol 26(4):253–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02563-zCrossRefPubMed

Parks AG, Porter NH, Hardcastle J (1966) The syndrome of the descending perineum. Proc R Soc Med 59(6):477–482PubMedPubMedCentral

Felt-Bersma RJ, Tiersma ES, Cuesta MA (2008) Rectal prolapse, rectal intussusception, rectocele, solitary rectal ulcer syndrome, and enterocele. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 37(3)645–68, ix. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gtc.2008.06.001

Ellis CN, Essani R (2012) Treatment of obstructed defecation. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 25(1):24–33. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1301756CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Khaikin M, Wexner SD (2006) Treatment strategies in obstructed defecation and fecal incontinence. World J Gastroenterol 12(20):3168–3173. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v12.i20.3168CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Schawkat K, Heinrich H, Parker HL, Barth BK, Mathew RP, Weishaupt D, Fox M, Reiner CS (2018) How to define pathologic pelvic floor descent in MR defecography during defecation? Abdom Radiol (NY) 43(12):3233–3240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1652-7CrossRefPubMed

12.

D’Hoore A (2017) Fine-tuning indications for laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. Tech Coloproctol 21(8):593–594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-017-1678-9CrossRefPubMed

13.

Makela-Kaikkonen JK, Rautio TT, Koivurova S, Paakko E, Ohtonen P, Biancari F, Makela JT (2016) Anatomical and functional changes to the pelvic floor after robotic versus laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A randomised study. Int Urogynecol J 27(12):1837–1845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3048-yCrossRefPubMed

14.

Gurland BH, Khatri G, Ram R, Hull TL, Kocjancic E, Quiroz LH, Sayed RFE, Jambhekar KR, Chernyak V, Paspulati RM, Sheth VR, Steiner AM, Kamath A, Shobeiri SA, Weinstein MM, Bordeianou L, D. Members of the Expert Workgroup on Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Pelvic Floor (2021) Consensus definitions and interpretation templates for magnetic resonance imaging of defecatory pelvic floor disorders: Proceedings of the consensus meeting of the pelvic floor disorders consortium of the american society of colon and rectal surgeons, the society of abdominal radiology, the international continence society, the american urogynecologic society, the international urogynecological association, and the society of gynecologic surgeons. AJR Am J Roentgenol 217(4):800–812. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.21.26488

15.

Boyadzhyan L, Raman SS, Raz S (2008) Role of static and dynamic MR imaging in surgical pelvic floor dysfunction. Radiographics 28(4):949–967. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.284075139CrossRefPubMed

16.

Agachan F, Chen T, Pfeifer J, Reissman P, Wexner SD (1996) A constipation scoring system to simplify evaluation and management of constipated patients. Dis Colon Rectum 39(6):681–685. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02056950CrossRefPubMed

17.

Schmulson MJ, Drossman DA (2017) What is new in Rome IV. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 23(2):151–163. https://doi.org/10.5056/jnm16214CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30(6):473–83

19.

Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15(2):155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Van den Broeck S, Jacquemyn Y, Hubens G, De Schepper H, Vermandel A, Komen N (2022) Rectocele: victim of availability bias? Results of a Belgian survey of colorectal and gynecological surgeons. Int Urogynecol J 33(12):3505–3517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05118-4CrossRefPubMed

21.

Aziz I, Whitehead WE, Palsson OS, Tornblom H, Simren M (2020) An approach to the diagnosis and management of Rome IV functional disorders of chronic constipation. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 14(1):39–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/17474124.2020.1708718CrossRefPubMed

22.

Tsunoda A, Takahashi T, Matsuda S, Oka N, Kusanagi H (2020) Midterm functional outcome after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse. Asian J Endosc Surg 13(1):25–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/ases.12701CrossRefPubMed

23.

Brunner M, Roth H, Gunther K, Grutzmann R, Matzel KE (2018) Ventral rectopexy with biological mesh: short-term functional results. Int J Colorectal Dis 33(4):449–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-018-2972-3CrossRefPubMed

24.

Abdelnaby M, Fathy M, Abdallah E, Balata M, Arnous M, Mikhail HM, Emile SH (2021) Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy versus transvaginal posterior colporrhaphy in Management of Anterior Rectocele. J Gastrointest Surg 25(8):2035–2046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-020-04823-zCrossRefPubMed

25.

Naldini G, Fabiani B, Sturiale A, Russo E, Simoncini T (2021) Advantages of robotic surgery in the treatment of complex pelvic organs prolapse. Updates Surg 73(3):1115–1124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00913-4CrossRefPubMed

26.

Tsunoda A, Takahashi T, Ohta T, Kusanagi H (2016) Quality of life after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. Color Dis 18(8):O301–O310. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13247CrossRef

27.

Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC (2005) Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol 193(1):103–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.025CrossRefPubMed

28.

Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak D, Khalsa S, Qualls C (2003) A short form of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 14(3):164–8; discussion 168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-003-1063-2

29.

Mehmood RK, Parker J, Bhuvimanian L, Qasem E, Mohammed AA, Zeeshan M, Grugel K, Carter P, Ahmed S (2014) Short-term outcome of laparoscopic versus robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Is robotic superior? Int J Color Dis 29(9):1113–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-014-1937-4

30.

Picchia S, Rengo M, Bellini D, Caruso D, Pironti E, Floris R, Laghi A (2019) Dynamic MR of the pelvic floor: Influence of alternative methods to draw the pubococcygeal line (PCL) on the grading of pelvic floor descent. Eur J Radiol Open 6:187–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2019.05.002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Landmann RG, Wexner SD (2008) Paradoxical puborectalis contraction and increased perineal descent. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 21(2):138–145. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1075863CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Korula DR, Chandramohan A, John R, Eapen A (2021) Barium defecating proctography and dynamic magnetic resonance proctography: their role and patient’s perception. J Clin Imaging Sci 11:31. https://doi.org/10.25259/JCIS_56_2021CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Ventral mesh rectopexy. Does a descending perineum impact functional results and quality of life?
Authors: Ali Al-Nejar
Sylvie Van den Broeck
Quinten Smets
Philip Plaeke
Maarten Spinhoven
Guy Hubens
Niels Komen
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Rectopexy
Constipation
Constipation
Published in: Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 1435-2443
Electronic ISSN: 1435-2451
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-024-03236-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Ventral mesh rectopexy. Does a descending perineum impact functional results and quality of life?

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Laparoscopy training of novices with complex curved instruments using 2D- and 3D-visualization

Anterior versus posterior mediastinal reconstruction after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The weepy cry – short neural signal bursts in intraoperative neuromonitoring

Feasibility of robotic platform to perform R0 resection for locally advanced multi-visceral pelvic malignancy: an institutional experience on outcomes of robotic pelvic exenteration

Incidence and clinical features of endometriosis in 2484 consecutive female patients undergoing appendectomy for suspected appendicitis—a retrospective analysis

Laparoscopic radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (RAMPS) for adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas — technical considerations with analysis of surgical outcomes