Which Operative Repair is Associated with a Higher Likelihood of Reoperation after Rectal Prolapse Repair?

The rate of reoperation after transabdominal as compared with transperineal repair for rectal prolapse is unknown. We evaluated all patients who underwent surgical treatment for rectal prolapse performed through transabdominal or transperineal repair from the trackable California Inpatient data files and Revisit Analyses during the time period of January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2007. We specifically evaluated rates of reoperation and stoma formation during the 36-month study period. A total of 3400 patient discharges with rectal prolapse from California during the 36-month study period was identified. Of this cohort, 1772 patients had one or more prolapse repairs. Procedures were more likely to be performed through a transabdominal (1035 [58%]) as compared with a transperineal approach (737 [42%]). There was no difference in reoperation for transabdominal (11%) as compared with transperineal procedures (11%; P = 0.9). However, a significantly larger proportion of patients underwent stoma formation after transabdominal (8%) as compared with transperineal repair (5%; P < 0.02). Time to reoperation was not significantly different for patients treated with transabdominal (295 ± 254 days) as compared with transperineal repair (271 ± 246 days; P = 0.6). In conclusion, the risk of reoperation is substantial for both transabdominal and transperineal procedures for rectal prolapse.

[1]  J. S. Thomas,et al.  Rectal prolapse in the elderly: trends in surgical management and outcomes from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[2]  T. Eisenstat,et al.  Is the Abdominal Repair of Rectal Prolapse Safer than Perineal Repair in the Highest Risk Patients? An NSQIP Analysis , 2012, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[3]  D. Schoetz,et al.  Complications After Rectal Prolapse Surgery: Does Approach Matter? , 2012, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[4]  N. Baxter,et al.  Who Performs Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer in the United States? , 2011, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[5]  H. Selker,et al.  Disparate use of minimally invasive surgery in benign surgical conditions , 2008, Surgical Endoscopy.

[6]  H. Selker,et al.  Volume-outcome relationship for coronary artery bypass grafting in an era of decreasing volume. , 2008, Archives of surgery.

[7]  G. Roviaro,et al.  Impact of New Technologies on the Clinical and Functional Outcome of Altemeier's Procedure: A Randomized, Controlled Trial , 2006, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[8]  G. Salkeld,et al.  Economic impact of laparoscopic versus open abdominal rectopexy , 2004, The British journal of surgery.

[9]  H. Järvinen,et al.  Abdominal rectopexy with sigmoidectomy vs. rectopexy alone for rectal prolapse: A prospective, randomized study , 1992, International Journal of Colorectal Disease.

[10]  C. Young,et al.  Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse , 2002, The British journal of surgery.

[11]  R. Mollen,et al.  Effects of rectal mobilization and lateral ligaments division on colonic and anorectal function , 2000, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[12]  R. Rosati,et al.  Comparison of laparoscopic rectopexy with open technique in the treatment of complete rectal prolapse: clinical and functional results. , 1998, Surgical laparoscopy & endoscopy.

[13]  M. Rabau,et al.  Comparison of polyglycolic acid and polypropylene mesh for rectopexy in the treatment of rectal prolapse. , 1997, The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica.

[14]  M. Osborne,et al.  Prospective randomized trial of Ivalon sponge versus sutured rectopexy for full‐thickness rectal prolapse , 1994, The British journal of surgery.

[15]  E. Grant,et al.  Abdominal resection rectopexy with pelvic floor repair versus perineal rectosigmoidectomy and pelvic floor repair for full‐thickness rectal prolapse , 1994, The British journal of surgery.

[16]  G. Winde,et al.  Clinical and functional results of abdominal rectopexy with absorbable mesh-graft for treatment of complete rectal prolapse. , 1993, The European journal of surgery = Acta chirurgica.

[17]  J. Krige,et al.  Traumatic pancreatic pseudocysts , 1993, The British journal of surgery.

[18]  M. Kamm,et al.  Lateral ligament division during rectopexy causes constipation but prevents recurrence: Results of a prospective randomized study , 1991, The British journal of surgery.