Côlon & Rectum

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 29–31

Résultats factuels pour le traitement du prolapsus rectal: est-ce possible, comment avancer ?

Dossier Thématique / Thematic File
  • 47 Downloads

Résumé

La prise en charge opératoire du prolapsus rectal ne permet pas actuellement de définir des standards, tant par un manque d’uniformité de la technique que par une évaluation des patients imparfaite et peu objective. Une meilleure compréhension des mécanismes qui provoquent le prolapsus pourrait également aider à mieux poser les indications

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Références

  1. 1.
    Tou SBS, Malik AI, Nelson RL (2009) Surgery for complete rectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (Issue 4)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Xynos E, Chrysos E, Tsiaoussis J, et al (1999) Resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse. The laparoscopic approach. Surg Endosc 13:862–864Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kellokumpu IH, Vironen J, Scheinin T (2000) Laparoscopic repair of rectal prolapse: a prospective study evaluating surgical outcome and changes in symptoms and bowel function. Surg Endosc 14:634–640PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benoist S, Taffinder N, Gould S, et al (2001) Functional results two years after laparoscopic rectopexy. Am J Surg. 182:168–173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilson J, Engledow A, Crosbie J, et al (2010) Laparoscopic nonresectional suture rectopexy in the management of full-thickness rectal prolapse: substantive retrospective series. Surg Endosc (in press)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bruyere F, Rozenberg H, Abdelkader T (2001) Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy: an attractive approach for prolapse repair. Prog Urol 11:1320–1326PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rivoire C, Botchorishvili R, Canis M, et al (2007) Complete laparoscopic treatment of genital prolapse with meshes including vaginal promontofixation and anterior repair: a series of 138 patients. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 14:712–718PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wagner L, Boileau L, Delmas V, et al (2009) Surgical treatment of prolapse using coelioscopic promontofixation: techniques and results. Prog Urol 19:994–1005PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Altomare DF, Spazzafumo L, Rinaldi M, et al (2008) Set-up and statistical validation of a new scoring system for obstructed defaecation syndrome. Colorectal Dis 10:84–88PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Agachan F, Chen T, Pfeifer J, et al (1996) A constipation scoring system to simplify evaluation and management of constipated patients. Dis Colon Rectum 39:681–685PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knowles CH, Eccersley AJ, Scott SM, et al (2000) Linear discriminant analysis of symptoms in patients with chronic constipation: validation of a new scoring system (KESS). Dis Colon Rectum 43:1419–1426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pescatori M, Anastasio G, Bottini C, Mentasti A (1992) New grading and scoring for anal incontinence. Evaluation of 335 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 35:482–487PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jorge JM, Wexner SD (1993) Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36:77–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vaizey CJ, Carapeti E, Cahill JA, Kamm MA (1999) Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems. Gut 44(1):77–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eypasch E, Williams JI, Wood-Dauphinee S, et al (1995) Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index: development, validation and application of a new instrument. Br J Surg 82:216–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Slim K, Bousquet J, Kwiatkowski F, et al (1999) First validation of the French version of the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI). Gastroenterol Clin Biol 23:25–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    de Tayrac R, Deval B, Fernandez H, Mares P (2007) Development of a linguistically validated French version of two short-form, condition-specific quality of life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 36:738–748Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Verlag France 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Clinique de chirurgie digestive et endocrine, institut des maladies de l’appareil digestifCHU de Nantes Hôtel-DieuNantesFrance

Personalised recommendations