Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Excellent outcome using selective criteria for rectocele repair

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to review our experience with patients with rectoceles using very selective criteria for operative repair and to critically review our surgical results. METHODS: This is a review of patients selected for rectocele repair between 1989 and 1994. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-nine patients were evaluated for pelvic outlet symptoms in our clinic. Defecography was performed in 180 patients; rectocele was seen in 143 patients (79 percent; 135 females and 8 males). On physical examination, 132 patients had a palpable rectocele (73 percent). Rectocele repair was recommended for 35 patients (13 percent); 33 (32 females and 1 male) underwent this procedure. Mean age was 55 (range, 16–78) years. Although many patients complained of constipation, incontinence and pelvic pain, in these 33 patients criteria for repair included the sensation of a vaginal mass or bulge that required digital support and/or rectal digitizing for evacuation (58 percent), retention of barium in the rectocele on defecography (55 percent), or a very large rectocele with internal anterior rectal wall prolapse (6 percent). A hysterectomy had been performed previously in 47 percent of women repaired. Rectocele repair was performed by a standard transanal approach in 31 patients and transabdominally in 2 patients. Hospital stay averaged 3.7 (range, 1–8) days. Few postoperative complications occurred; urinary retention was the most common (18 percent). All patients were followed postoperatively, and 26 patients (79 percent) answered a standardized questionnaire. Mean follow-up was 31 (range, 5–64) months. Eighty percent of patients questioned who initially complained of a vaginal mass or bulge reported complete resolution (significant improvement by the sign test,P < 0.5). Subjectively, 92 percent of patients questioned reported improvement in their preoperative symptoms and satisfaction with the operation. CONCLUSION: Rectoceles are frequently identified during defecography, which is performed for pelvic floor complaints, yet are often asymptomatic. In contrast to other recent reports of rectocele repair, our data indicate that careful selection of patients using specific criteria may result in very good clinical results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bartram CI, Turnbull GK, Lennard-Jones JE. Evacuation proctography: an investigation of rectal expulsion in 20 subjects without defecatory disturbance. Gastrointest Radiol 1988;13:72–80.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Siproudhis L, Dautreme S, Ropert A,et al. Dyschezia and rectocele—a marriage of convenience? Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:1030–6.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Block IR. Transrectal repair of rectocele using obliterative suture. Dis Colon Rectum 1986;29:707–11.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Johansson C, Nilsson BY, Holmström B, Dolk A, Mellgren A. Association between rectocele and paradoxical sphincter response. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:503–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Yoshioka K, Matsui Y, Yamada O,et al. Physiologic and anatomic assessment of patients with rectocele. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:704–8.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Shorvon PJ, McHugh S, Diamant NE, Somers S, Stevenson GW. Defecography in normal volunteers: results and implications. Gut 1989;30:1737–49.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Arnold MW, Stewart WR, Aguilar PS. Rectocele repair: four years' experience. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:684–7.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Benson JT. Rectocele, descending perineal syndrome, enterocele. In: Benson JT, ed. Female pelvic floor disorders: investigation and management. New York: WW Norton, 1992:380–9.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mellgren A, Anzen B, Nilsson BY,et al. Results of rectocele repair: a prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:7–13.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Khubchandani IT, Sheets JA, Stasik JJ, Hakki AR. Endorectal repair of rectocele. Dis Colon Rectum 1983;26:792–6.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kelvin FM, Maglinte DD, Hornback JA, Benson JT. Pelvic prolapse: assessment with evacuation proctography (defecography). Radiology 1992;184:547–51.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kelvin FM, Maglinte DD, Benson JT. Evacuation proctography (defecography): an aid to the investigation of pelvic floor disorders. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83:307–13.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Goei R. Anorectal function in patients with defecation disorders and asymptomatic subjects: evaluation with defecography. Radiology 1990;174:121–3.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, May 7 to 12, 1995.

No reprints are available.

About this article

Cite this article

Murthy, V.K., Orkin, B.A., Smith, L.E. et al. Excellent outcome using selective criteria for rectocele repair. Dis Colon Rectum 39, 374–378 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02054049

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02054049

Key words

Navigation