International Journal of Colorectal Disease

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 42–44 | Cite as

The risk of infection of three synthetic materials used in rectopexy with or without colonic resection for rectal prolapse

  • S. Athanasiadis
  • G. Weyand
  • J. Heiligers
  • L. Heumüller
  • L. Barthelmes
Original Articles

Abstract

The incidence of infection was compared after the use of synthetic implants in abdominal rectopexy with (145 patients) and without (77 patients) synchronous colon resection. Three different materials were used, including polyvinyl alcohol (Ivalon) (n=87), polyglactin (Vicryl) mesh (n=109), and Gore-Tex (n=26). In patients having colonic resection two (3.7%) pelvic infections occurred in the polyvinyl alcohol (Ivalon) group, one abdominal infection with polyglactin (Vicryl) and none with Gore-Tex. In the group without colonic resection, two patients (3.0%) developed infection after polyvinyl alcohol (Ivalon) insertion with none occurring after polyglactin (Vicryl) or Gore-Tex. Overall mortality was 0.4%. Followup ranged from 3 to 120 months. There were 3 (1.9%) cases of recurrent prolapse in 151 patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse.

Keywords

Public Health Alcohol Internal Medicine Polyvinyl Alcohol Rectal Prolapse 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Résumé

L'incidence d'infections a été comparée entre 145 patients ayant subi une rectopexie avec mise en place de matériel prothétique synthétique sans résection et 75 patients ayant subi une résection colique synchrone. Trois matériaux distincts ont été utilisés: des mousses de polyvinyl alcohol (Ivalon) (n=87), filet de polyglactine (Vicryl) (n=09) et Gore-Tex (n=26). Dans le groupe de patients ayant subi une résection colique synchrone, deux infections pelviennes (3,7%) se sont produites après implantation d'Ivalon, une infection abdominale s'est produite après implantation d'un filet de Vicryl et aucune après implantation de Gore-Tex. Dans le collectif sans résection colique, deux patients (3%) ont développé une infection après implantation d'une plaque d'Ivalon alors qu'aucune infection ne s'est produite après implantation d'un filet de Vicryl ou de Gore-Tex. La mortalité totale est de 0.4%. Le follow-up varie de 3 à 120 mois. Trois patients (1.9%) ont développé une récidive du prolapsus sur les 151 porteurs d'un prolapsus rectal complet.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Athanasiadis S, Heiligers J, Kossivakis D (1992) Anteriore and posteriore Rektopexie mit Levatorraffung bei Patienten mit Rektumprolaps und Inkontinenz. Langenbecks Arch Chir 337: 288–294Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    McCue JL, Thomson JPS (1991) Clinical and functional results of abdominal rectopexy for complete rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 78:921–923Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Frykman HM (1955) Abdominal proctopexy and primary sigmoid resection for rectal procidentia. Am J Surg 90:780–787Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Madden MV, Kamm MA, Nicholls RJ, Santhanam AN, Speakman CTM (1992) Abdominal rectopexy for complete prolapse: Prospective Study Evaluating Changes in Symptoms and Anorectal Function. Dis Colon Rectum 35:48–55Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Morgan CN, Porter NH, Klugmann DJ (1972) Ivalon (polyviryl alcohol) sponge in the repair of complete rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 59:841–846Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ripstein CB (1952) Treatment of massive rectal prolapse. Am J Surg 83:68–71Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wells C (1959) New operation for rectal prolapse. Proc R Soc Mec 52:602–603Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sayfan J, Pinho M, Alexander-Williams J, Keighley MRB (1990) Sutured posterior abdominal rectopexy with sigmoidectomy compared with Marlex rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 77:143–145Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scaglia M, Fasth S, Hallgren T, Nordgren S, Oresland T, Hultén L (1994) Abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse; influence of surgical technique on functional outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 37:805–813Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arndt M, Pircher W (1988) Absorbable mesh in the treatment of rectal prolapse. Int J Colorect Dis 3:141–143Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jurgeleit HC, Corman ML, Coller JA, Veidenheimer MC (1975) Procidentia of the rectum: Teflon sling repair of rectal prolapse. Lahey Clinic experience. Dis Colon Rectum 18:464–467Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Duthie GS, Bartolo DC (1992) Abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a comparison of techniques. Br J Surg 79:107–113Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Speakman CTM, Madden MV, Nicholls RJ, Kamm MA (1991) Lateral ligament division during rectopexy causes constipation but prevents recurrence: results of a prospective randomized study. Br J Surg 78:1431–1433Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Athanasiadis S, Heiligers J, Kuprian A, Heumüller L (1995) Chirurgische Therapie des Rectumprolapses mittels Rectopexie und Resektion. Chirurg 66:27–33Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tjandra JJ, Church JM, Fazio VW, Lavery IC, Oakley JR, Milsom JW (1992) Resection/Rectopexy is Superior to the Ripstein Procedure in Patients with Rectal Prolapse and Constipation. (Abstracts). Dis Colon Rectum 35:30Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luukkonen P, Mikkonen U, Järvinen H (1992) Abdominal rectopexy with sigmoidectomy vs. rectopexy alone for rectal prolapse: A prospective, randomized study. Int J Colorect Dis 7: 219–222Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McKee RF, Lauder JC, Poon FW, Aitchison MA, Finlay IG (1992) A prospective randomized study of abdominal rectopexy with and without sigmoidectomy in rectal prolapse. Surg Gynecol Obstet 174:145–148Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Athanasiadis S, Heiligers J (1993) Der Wert der abdominellen Rektopexie bei obstruktiven Defäkationsstörungen. Langenbecks Arch Chir 378:92–101Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kupfer CA, Goligher JC (1970) One hundred consecutive cases of complete prolapse of the rectum treated by operation. Br J Surg 57:481–487Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wedell J, Schlageter M, Meier zu Eissen P, Banzhaf G, Castrup W, Calker H van (1987) Die Problematik der pelvinen Sepsis nach Rectopexie mittels Kunststoff und ihre Behandlung. Chirurg 58:423–427Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lake SP, Hancock BD, Lewis AAM (1984) Management of pelvic sepsis after Ivalon rectopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 27:589–590Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Penfold JC, Hawley PR (1972) Experiences of Ivalon sponge implant for complete rectal prolapse at St. Marks (1960–1970). Br J Surg 59:846–848Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ross AH, Thomson JPS (1989) Management of infection after prosthetic abdominal-rectopexy (Wells procedure). Br J Surg 76:610–612Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gordon PH, Hoexter B (1978) Complications of Ripstein procedure. Dis Colon Rectum 21:277–280Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Keighley MRB, Fielding JWL, Alexander-Williams J (1983) Rectopexy for rectal prolapse in 100 consecutive patients. Br J Surg 70:229–232Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Winde G, Reers B, Nottberg H, Berns T, Meyer J, Bünte H (1993) Clinical and functional results of abdominal rectopexy with absorbable meshgraft for treatment of complete rectal prolapse. Eur J Surg 159:301–305Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Athanasiadis
    • 1
  • G. Weyand
    • 1
  • J. Heiligers
    • 1
  • L. Heumüller
    • 1
  • L. Barthelmes
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ColoproctologySt Joseph Hospital Duisburg LaarDuisburgGermany

Personalised recommendations