Abstract
Purpose
Laparoscopic rectopexy to treat full-thickness rectal prolapse has proven short-term benefits, but there is little long-term follow-up and functional outcome data available.
Methods
Patients who had abdominal surgery for prolapse during a ten-year period were identified and interviewed to ascertain details of prolapse recurrence, constipation, incontinence, cosmesis, and satisfaction. Additional details on recurrences that required surgery and mortality were obtained from chart review and the State Death Registry.
Results
Of 321 prolapse operations, laparoscopic rectopexy was performed in 126 patients, open rectopexy in 46, and resection rectopexy in 21 patients. At a median follow-up of five years after laparoscopic rectopexy, there were five (4 percent) confirmed full-thickness recurrences that required surgery. Actuarial recurrence rates of laparoscopic rectopexy were 6.9 percent at five years (95 percent confidence interval, 0.1–13.8 percent) and 10.8 percent at ten years (95 percent confidence interval, 0.9–20.1 percent). Seven patients underwent rubber band ligation for mucosal prolapse and seven required other surgical procedures. There was one recurrence after open rectopexy (2.4 percent) and one after resection rectopexy (4.7 percent), and there was no significant difference between groups. Overall constipation scores were not increased after laparoscopic rectopexy, with no significant difference to open rectopexy or resection rectopexy.
Conclusions
This study has demonstrated that laparoscopic rectopexy has reliable long-term results for treating rectal prolapse, including low recurrence rates and no overall change in functional outcomes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Senapti A. Rectal prolapse. In: Phillips RK. Colorectal surgery. Philadelphia: Saunders, 2001:251–71.
Azimuddin K, Khubchandani IT, Rosen L, Stasik JJ, Riether RD, Reed JF. Rectal prolapse: a search for the “best” operation. Am Surg 2001;67:622–7.
Kim DS, Tsang CB, Wong WD, Lowry AC, Goldberg SM, Madoff RD. Complete rectal prolapse: evolution of management and results. Dis Colon Rectum 1999;42:460–6.
Solomon MJ, Eyers AA. Laparoscopic rectopexy using mesh fixation with a spiked chromium staple. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:279–84.
Boccasanta P, Venturi M, Reitano MC, et al. Laparotomic vs. laparoscopic rectopexy in complete rectal prolapse. Dig Surg 1999;16:415–9.
Kairaluoma MV, Viljakka MT, Kellokumpu IH. Open vs. laparoscopic surgery for rectal prolapse: a case-controlled study assessing short term outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 2003;46:353–60.
Solomon MJ, Young CJ, Eyers AA, Roberts RA. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 2002;89:35–9.
Luniss PJ, Kamm MA, Phillips RK. Factors affecting continence after surgery for anal fistula. Br J Surg 1994;81:1382–5.
Rome III Diagnostic Questionnaire for the Adult Functional GI Disorders (including Alarm questions) and Scoring Algorithm Appendix C. Available at http://www.romecriteria.org.pdfs/AdultFunctGIQ.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2004.
Salkeld G, Bagia M, Solomon M. Economic impact of laparoscopic versus open abdominal rectopexy. Br J Surg 2004;91:1188–91.
Duthie GS, Bartolo DC. Abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a comparison of techniques. Br J Surg 1992;79:107–13.
Madoff RD, Williams JG, Wong WD, Rothenberger DA, Goldberg SM. Long term functional results of colon resection and rectopexy for overt rectal prolapse. Am J Gastroenterol 1992;87:101–4.
McKee RF, Lauder JC, Poon FW, Altchison MA, Finlay IG. A prospective randomized study of abdominal rectopexy with and without sigmoidectomy in rectal prolapse. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1992;174:145–8.
Ashari LH, Lumley JW, Stevenson AR, Stitz RW. Laparoscopically-assisted resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a ten-year experience. Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48:982–7.
Raftopoulos Y, Senagore AJ, Di Diuoro G, et al. Recurrence rates after abdominal surgery for complete rectal prolapse: a multicenter pooled analysis of 643 individual patient data. Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48:1200–6.
Novell JR, Osborne MJ, Winslet MC, Lewis AA. Prospective randomized trial of Ivalon sponge versus sutured rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 1994;81:904–6.
Penfold JC, Hawley PR. Experience of Ivalon sponge implant for complete rectal prolapse at St. Marks Hospital 1960–1970. Br J Surg 1972;59:846–8.
DiGiuro G, Ignjatovic D, Brogger J, et al. How accurate are published recurrence rates after rectal prolapse surgery? A meta-analysis of individual patient data. Am J Surg 2006;191:773–8.
Luukkonen P, Mikkonen U, Jarvinen H. Abdominal rectopexy with sigmoidectomy versus rectopexy alone for rectal prolapse: a prospective, randomized study. Int J Colrectal Dis 1992;7:219–22.
Kellokumpu IH, Vironen J, Scheinin T. Laparoscopic repair of rectal prolapse: a prospective study evaluating surgical outcome and changes in symptoms and bowel function. Surg Endosc 2000;14:634–40.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. Census of Population and Housing: population growth and distribution, Australia, cat no. 2035.0. Canberra, Australia: ABS, 2001:38–58.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank all of the patients who participated, and Christine Merlino and Pauline Byrne who interviewed the patients.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Dr. Byrne was supported by the Notaras Fellowship from the University of Sydney, the Scientific Foundation of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons and the training board of the Colorectal Society of Australasia.
About this article
Cite this article
Byrne, C.M., Smith, S.R., Solomon, M.J. et al. Long-Term Functional Outcomes After Laparoscopic and Open Rectopexy for the Treatment of Rectal Prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 51, 1597–1604 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-008-9365-6
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-008-9365-6