Abstract
Ventral mesh rectopexy is an approach in the treatment of internal and external rectal prolapse and rectocele. Our aim was to assess whether robotic surgery confers any significant advantages over laparoscopy, and the associated complication rate. Two reviewers performed a literature search using MEDLINE and PubMed databases for studies comparing robotic versus laparoscopic surgery. Five prospective, non-randomised studies were identified and included. A total of 244 patients (101 robotic and 143 laparoscopic) were included in the analysis. Operative time was shorter with laparoscopic surgery, mean weighted difference 27.94 [confidence interval (CI) 19.30–36.57; p < 0.00001]. The conversion rate was not significantly different between groups. There was a trend towards a reduction in length of inpatient stay and early post-operative complications in the robotic group; however, these did not reach statistical significance. Recurrence rates were similar between groups (odds ratio 0.91, CI 0.32–2.63; p = 0.87). Functional results were comparable between groups. Early studies show that robotic ventral rectopexy is a safe option compared to the laparoscopic approach, with overall comparable results. There appeared to be a trend towards a reduction in length of inpatient stay and post-operative complications. These perceived benefits may offset the longer operative times and outlay costs. Larger randomised controlled trials are needed to further evaluate clinical value and cost-effectiveness.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
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 defecation? Colorectal Dis 15:e468–e475
Formijne Jonkers HA, Poierrie N, Draaisma WA, Broeders IAMJ, Consten ECJ (2013) Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for rectal prolapse and symptomatic rectocele: an analysis of 245 consecutive patients. Colorectal Dis 15:695–699
Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R et al (2011) Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis 14:e134–e156
Perrenot C, Germain A, Scherrer ML, Avav A, Brunaud L, Bresler L (2013) Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 56:909–914
Mehmood RK, Parker J, Bhuvimanian L et al (2014) Short-term outcome of laparoscopic versus robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Is robotic superior? Int J Colorectal Dis 29:1113–1118
Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 20:13
Wong MT, Abet E, Rigaud J, Frampas E, Lehur PA, Meurette G (2011) Minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy for complex rectocele: impact on anorectal and sexual function. Colorectal Dis 13:e320–e326
Heemskerk J, de Hoog DE, van Gemert WG, Baeten CG, Greve JW, Bouvy ND (2007) Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a comparative study on costs and time. Dis Colon Rectum 50:1825–1830
de Hoog DE, Heemskerk J, Nieman FHM, van Gemert WG, Baeten CG, Bouvy ND (2009) Recurrence and functional results after open versus conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a case control study. Int J Colorectal Dis 24:1201–1206
Mäkelä-Kaikkonen J, Rautio T, Klintrup K et al (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
Brown AJ, Anderson JH, McKee RF, Finlay IG (2004) Strategy for selection of type of operation for rectal prolapse based on clinical criteria. Dis Colon Rectum 47:103–107
Zbar AP, Lienemann A, Fritsch H, Beer-Gabel M, Pescatori M (2003) Rectocele: pathogenesis and surgical management. Int J Colorectal Dis 18:369–384
Tou S, Brown SR, Malik AI, Nelson RL (2008) Surgery for complete rectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD001758
Wong M, Meurette G, Abet E, Podevin J, Lehur PA (2011) Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for complex rectocele. Colorectal Dis 13:1019–1023
Allen-Mersh TG, Turner MJ, Mann CV (1990) Effect of abdominal Ivalon rectopexy on bowel habit and rectal wall. Dis Colon Rectum 33:550–553
Yoshioka K, Heyen F, Keighley MR (1989) Functional results after posterior abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 32:835–838
D’Hoore A, Cadoni R, Penninckx F (2004) Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 91:1500–1505
Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Germay O et al (2001) Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg 11:1467–1477
Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D et al (2005) Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 19:117–119
Munz Y, Moorthy K, Kudchadkr RM et al (2002) Robotic assisted rectopexy. Am Surg 187:88–92
Gouvas N, Georgiou PA, Agalianos C et al (2015) Ventral colporectopexy for overt rectal prolapse and obstructed defaecation syndrome: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis 17:O34–O46
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent
For this type of study formal consent is not required.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ramage, L., Georgiou, P., Tekkis, P. et al. Is robotic ventral mesh rectopexy better than laparoscopy in the treatment of rectal prolapse and obstructed defecation? A meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol 19, 381–389 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-015-1320-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-015-1320-7