Open versus laparoscopic abdominal rectopexy: an examination of early postoperative outcomes
Abdominal rectopexy is used to treat full thickness rectal prolapse and obstructed defecation syndrome, with good outcomes. Use of a laparoscopic approach may reduce morbidity. The current study assessed short-term operative outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic or open rectopexy.
Rectopexy cases were identified from theater logs in two tertiary referral centers. Patient demographics, intra-operative details and early postoperative outcomes were examined.
There were 62 patients included over 10 years, a third of whom underwent laparoscopic rectopexy. Laparoscopy was associated with a longer operative time (195.9 versus 129.6 min, p = 0.003), but this did not affect postoperative outcomes, with no significant differences found for complication rates and length of stay between the two groups. Univariable analysis found no influence of laparoscopic approach on the likelihood of postoperative complications, and no factor achieved significance with multivariable analysis. This study included the first laparoscopic cases performed in the involved institutions, and a “learning curve” existed as seen with a decreasing operative duration per case over time (p = 0.002).
Laparoscopic rectopexy has similar short-term outcomes to open rectopexy.
KeywordsLaparoscopic Rectopexy Rectal prolapse Obstructed defecation
Conflict of interest
- 10.Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 365(9472):1718–1726. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66545-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Procter LD, Davenport DL, Bernard AC, Zwischenberger JB (2010) General surgical operative duration is associated with increased risk-adjusted infectious complication rates and length of hospital stay. J Am Coll Surg 210(1):60–65. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.09.034 e61–e62CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar