Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A 2-year anatomical and functional assessment of transvaginal rectocele repair using a polypropylene mesh

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study reports the 2-year results of an original technique for rectocele repair by the vaginal route, using a combined sacrospinous suspension and a polypropylene mesh. Twenty-six women were successively operated between October 2000 and February 2003. Mean age was 63.7 years [range 35–92]. 19 women had had previous pelvic surgery for prolapse and/or urinary incontinence (73.1%), but none had had a previous rectocele repair. Patients underwent physical examination staging of prolapse in the international pelvic organ prolapse staging system. Eleven women had stage 2 posterior vaginal wall prolapse (42.3%), seven had stage 3 (26.9%) and eight had stage 4 (30.8%). The procedure included a bilateral sacrospinous suspension and a polypropylene mesh (GyneMesh, Gynecare, Ethicon France) attached from the sacrospinous ligaments to the perineal body. We did not perform any associated posterior fascial repair, nor myorraphy. Patients were followed up for 10–44 months, with a median follow-up (±SD) of 22.7±9.2 months. Functional results and sexual function were evaluated using the PFDI, the PFIQ and the PISQ-12 self-questionnaires. Twenty-five women returned for follow-up (96.2%). At follow-up, 24 women were cured (92.3%) and one had asymptomatic stage 2 rectocele. All the patients but one had symptoms and impact on quality of life improved. No postoperative infection of the mesh or rectovaginal fistula was found, but there were three vaginal erosions (12%) and one out of 13 had de novo dyspareunia (7.7%).

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. Shafik A, El-Sibai O, Shafik AA, Ahmed I (2003) On the pathogenesis of rectocele: the concept of the rectovaginal pressure gradient. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 14(5):310–315

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wiskind AK, Creighton SM, Stanton SL (1992) The incidence of genital prolapse after the Burch colposuspension. Am J Obstet Gynecol 167:399–404

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ho YH, Ang MG, Nyam D, Tan M, Seow-Choen F (1998) Transanal approach to rectocele repair may compromise anal sphincter pressures. Dis Colon Rectum 41(3):354–358

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kahn MA, Stanton SL (1997) Posterior colporraphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104(1):82–86

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cundiff GW, Weidner AC, Visco AG, Addison WA, Bump RC (1998) An anatomic and functional assessement of the discrete defect rectocele repair. Am J Obstet Gynecol 179(6 Pt 1):1451–1456

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Porter WE, Steele A, Walsh P, Kohli N, Karram MM (1999) The anatomical and functional outcomes of defect-specific rectocele repairs. Am J Obstet Gynecol 181(6):1353–1358

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sand PK, Koduri S, Lobel RW, et al (2001) Prospective randomized trial of polyglactin 910 mesh to prevent recurrence of cystoceles and rectoceles. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:1357–1364

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. de Tayrac R, Chauveaud-Lambling A, Fernandez D, Fernandez H (2003) Quality of life instruments for women with pelvic organ prolapse. (French). J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 32:503–523

    Google Scholar 

  9. Barber MD, Kuchibhata MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC (2001) Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition specific quality of life instrument for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:1388:1395

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rogers RG, Coates KW, Kammerer-Doak DN, Khalsa S, Qualls C (2003) A short form of the pelvic organ prolapse/urinary incontinence sexual questionnaire (PISQ-12). Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 14(3):164–168

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Heriot AG, Skull A, Kumar D (2004) Functional and physiological outcome following transanal repair of rectocele. Br J Surg 91(10):1340

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ayav A, Bresler L, Brunaud L, Boissel P (2004) Long-term results of transanal repair of rectocele using linear stapler. Dis Colon Rectum 47(6):889–894

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Boccasanta P, Venturi M, Calabro G et al (2001) Which surgical approach for rectocele? A multicentric report from Italian coloproctologists. Tech Coloproctol 5(3):149–156

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dodi G, Pietroletti R, Milito G, Binda G, Pescatori M (2003) Bleeding, incontinence, pain and constipation after STARR transanal double stapling rectotomy for obstructed defecation. Tech Coloproctol 7(3):148–153

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. de Tayrac R, Gervaise A, Chauveaud A, Fernandez H (2005) Tension-free polypropylene mesh for vaginal repair of anterior vaginal wall prolapse. J Reprod Med 50:75–80

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L et al. (2004) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 104(4):805–823

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Deval B, Rafii A, Azria E, Darai E, Levardon M (2003) Vaginal mesh erosion 7 years after a sacral colpopexy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 82(7):674–675

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Watson SJ, Loder PB, Halligan S, Bartram CI, Kamm MA, Phillips RK (1996) Transperineal repair of symptomatic rectocele with Marlex mesh: a clinical, physiological and radiologic assessement for treatment. J Am Coll Surg 183(3):257–261

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sullivan ES, Longaker CJ, Lee PY (2001) Total pelvic mesh repair: a ten-year experience. Dis Colon Rectum 44(6):857–863

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Von Theobald P, Labbe E (2003) [Three-way prosthetic repair of the pelvic floor]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris)32(6):562–570

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lechaux JP, Lechaux D, Bataille P, Bars I (2004) Transperineal repair of rectocele with prosthetic mesh. A prospective study (French). Ann Chir 129(4):211–217

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mercer-Jones MA, Sprowson A, Varma JS (2004) Outcome after transperineal mesh repair of rectocele: a case series. Dis Colon Rectum 47(6):864–868

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kohli N, Miklos JR (2003) Dermal graft-augmented rectocele repair. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 14(2):146–149

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Moore RD, Miklos JR, Kohli N (2004) Posterior repair with dermal graft: comparison of procine and human grafts. Joint meeting of the International Continence Society and the International Urogynaecology Association, Paris, August [Abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  25. Farnsworth B (2004) Posterior vaginal repair with PelvicolTM graft in severe and recurrent entero-rectocoele. Joint meeting of the International Continence Society and the International Urogynaecology Association, Paris, August [Abstract]

  26. Taylor G, Moore RD, Miklos J, Mattox T (2004) Posterior repair with perforated porcine dermal graft. Joint meeting of the International Continence Society and the International Urogynaecology Association, Paris, August [Abstract]

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renaud de Tayrac.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

de Tayrac, R., Picone, O., Chauveaud-Lambling, A. et al. A 2-year anatomical and functional assessment of transvaginal rectocele repair using a polypropylene mesh. Int Urogynecol J 17, 100–105 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-005-1317-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-005-1317-2

Keywords

Navigation