Results of Delorme's procedure for rectal prolapse. Advantages of a modified technique

Perineal rectosigmoidectomy for rectal prolapse-the preferred procedure for the unfit elderly patient? 10 years experience from a UK tertiary centre

BACKGROUND

Rectal prolapse is a disease presentation with a prevalence of about 1%, mainly affecting older women. It usually presents with symptoms of rectal mass, rectal bleeding, fecal incontinence or constipation, with patients frequently feeling socially isolated as a result. Perineal rectosigmoidectomy is associated with lesser morbidity and mortality than the abdominal procedure, but with a much higher recurrence rate. Therefore, this technique is mainly suitable for the frail elderly patient. Specific outcomes in an elderly population have been described in only a few studies. We evaluated the morbidity, mortality, recurrence rate and functional results after this procedure related to age.

METHODS

All patients who underwent a perineal rectosigmoidectomy over a 10-year period in two tertiary referral centers were included in the study. American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grade, pre- and postoperative symptoms, pathology-reported post-fixation specimen length, length of in-patient stay, 30-day morbidity/mortality, and recurrence were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients underwent a perineal rectosigmoidectomy. Forty-three (95%) were female, with a median age of 82.0 years (IQR 70.5-86.5), ASA grade III and median follow-up of 20 months (range 8.5-45.5 months). Half of the cohort was over 80 years old. Significant symptomatic relief was achieved, predominantly the resolution of rectal mass (8.9% vs. 60.0% preoperatively), fecal incontinence (15.6% vs. 46.7%) and constipation (4.4% vs. 26.7%). The median length of stay was 6 days, while morbidity occurred in 14 patients (31.1%) and recurrence occurred in 6 patients (13%). There were no deaths within 30 days of the procedure and outcomes were comparable in the < 80 and ≥ 80 age group.

CONCLUSIONS

Perineal rectosigmoidectomy is safe for older patients with greater comorbidities resulting in good functional results and is associated with low morbidity and mortality.

Delorme's Procedure for Complete Rectal Prolapse: A Study of Recurrence Patterns in the Long Term

Introduction. The objective of this study was to determine the recurrence rate and associated risk factors of full-thickness rectal prolapse in the long term after Delorme's procedure. Patients and Methods. The study involved adult patients with rectal prolapse treated with Delorme's surgery between 2000 and 2012 and followed up prospectively in an outpatient unit. We assessed epidemiological data, Wexner constipation and incontinence score, recurrence patterns, and risk factors. Data were analyzed by univariate and multivariate studies and follow-up was performed according to Kaplan-Meier technique. The primary outcome was recurrence. Results. A total of 42 patients, where 71.4% (n = 30) were women, with a median age of 76 years (IQR 66 to 86), underwent Delorme's surgery. The median follow-up was 85 months (IQR 28 to 132). There was no mortality, and morbidity was 9.5%. Recurrence occurred in five patients (12%) within 14 months after surgery. Actuarial recurrence at five years was 9.9%. According to the univariate analysis, constipation and concomitant pelvic floor repair were the only factors found to be associated with recurrence. Multivariate analysis showed no statistically significant differences among variables studied. Kaplan-Meier estimate revealed that constipation was associated with a higher risk of recurrence (log-rank test, p = 0.006). Conclusions. Delorme's procedure is a safe technique with an actuarial recurrence at five years of 9.9%. The outcomes obtained in this study support the performance of concomitant postanal repair and levatorplasty to reduce recurrences. Also, severe constipation is associated with a higher recurrence rate.

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biologic mesh for the treatment of obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse: a critical appraisal of the first 100 cases

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) is gaining wider acceptance as the preferred procedure to correct internal as well as external rectal prolapse associated with obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence. Very few reports exist on the use of biologic mesh for LVR. The aim of our study was to report the complication and recurrence rate of our first 100 cases of LVR for symptomatic internal rectal prolapse and/or rectocele using a porcine dermal collagen mesh.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data on LVR for internal rectal prolapse were analysed. Surgical complications and functional results in terms of faecal incontinence (measured with the Faecal Incontinence Severity Index = FISI) and constipation (measured with the Wexner Constipation Score = WCS) at 3, 6 and 12 months were analysed. It was considered an improvement if FISI or WCS scores were reduced by at least 25 % and a cure if the FISI score decreased to <10 and the WCS decreased to <5.

RESULTS

Between April 2009 and April 2013, 100 consecutive female patients (mean age 63 years, range 24-88 years) underwent LVR. All patients had internal rectal prolapse (grade III [n = 25] and grade IV [n = 75] according to the Oxford classification) and rectocele. Mean operative time was 85 ± 40 min. Conversion rate to open technique was 1 %. There was no post-operative mortality. Overall 16 patients (16 %) experienced 18 complications, including rectal perforation (n = 1), small bowel obstruction (n = 2), urinary tract infection (n = 8), subcutaneous emphysema (n = 3), wound haematoma (n = 2), long lasting sacral pain (n = 1) and incisional hernia (1). Median post-operative length of stay was 2 days. Ninety-eight out of 100 patients completed follow-up. At the end of follow-up, the mean FISI score improved from 8.4 (±4.0 standard deviation (SD) p = 0.003) to 3.3 ± 2.3 SD (p = 0.04). Incontinence improved in 37 out of 43 patients (86 %), and 31 patients (72 %) were cured. Similarly, the mean WCS score improved from 18.4 ± 11.6 SD to 5.4 ± 4.1 SD (p = 0.04). Constipation improved in 82 out of 89 patients (92 %), and 70 patients (79 %) were cured. No worsening of continence status, constipation or sexual function was observed. Fourteen patients (14 %) experienced persistence or recurrence of prolapse.

CONCLUSIONS

LVR using biologic mesh is a safe and effective procedure for improving symptoms of obstructed defaecation and faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse associated with rectocele.

Short-term results after STARR versus internal Delorme for obstructed defecation: a non-randomized prospective study

Obstructed defecation syndrome due to internal intussusception and rectocele is a common disease, and various transanal surgical techniques have been proposed. Aim of the present study was to compare the internal Delorme (ID) and the stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) results in the treatment of patients with obstructed defecation syndrome. From September 2011 to May 2012, 23 patients were operated with STARR procedure and 12 patients with Delorme's procedure for obstructed defecation syndrome. All patients underwent preoperative assessment: clinical evaluation (Altomare ODS score, Wexner constipation scoring system), proctoscopy, defecography, anorectal manometry and endoanal ultrasonography. Surgery was proposed with: failure of medical therapy, incomplete defecation, and unsuccessful attempts with long periods spent in bathroom, defecation with digital assistance, use of enemas and defecography findings of rectoanal intussusception and rectocele. The average operative time was 28 min (range 15-65) for the STARR group and 56 min (range 28-96) for the ID group with a mean hospital stay of 2 days for both the procedures. The Wexner score significantly fell postoperatively from 17 to 4, 7 in STARR group and from 15.3 to 3.3 in the ID group. The Altomare score postoperatively fell from 18.2 to 5.5 for STARR group and from 16.5 to 5.3 for ID group. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two procedures considering the outcomes parameters and the complications. Both ID and STARR procedure seem to be effective in the treatment of ODS.

Laparoscopic Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse: Will it be the Gold Standard?

A review of the current literature is presented regarding the surgical management of full thickness rectal prolapse, comparing laparoscopic rectopexy with open abdominal operations and perineal procedures. Outcome measures include length of stay, short- and long-term outcomes and financial burdens. Current evidence suggests that laparoscopic rectopexy as treatment for full thickness rectal prolapse is a safe alternative to the other options.

Long-term outcome of robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse in elderly patients

AIM

Full-thickness rectal prolapse is common in the elderly, but there are no particular practice guidelines for its surgical management. We evaluated retrospectively the perioperative and long-term clinical results and function in elderly and younger patients with complete rectal prolapse after robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy (RALR).

METHOD

Seventy-seven patients who underwent RALR between 2002 and 2010 were divided into Group A (age < 75 years, n = 59) and Group B (age > 75 years, n = 18). Operative time, intra- and postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, short-term and long-term outcomes, recurrence rate and degree of satisfaction were evaluated.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups regarding operation time, conversion, morbidity or length of hospital stay. At a median follow-up of 51.8 (5-115) months, there was no difference in the improvement of faecal incontinence, recurrence and the degree of satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy is safe in patients aged over 75 years and gives similar results to those in patients aged < 75 years.

Rectal prolapse and intussusception

Rectal prolapse continues to be problematic for both patients and surgeons alike, in part because of increased recurrence rates despite several well-described operations. Patients should be aware that although the prolapse will resolve with operative therapy, functional results may continue to be problematic. This article describes the recommended evaluation, role of adjunctive testing, and outcomes associated with both perineal and abdominal approaches.

Delorme's Procedure: An Effective Treatment for a Full-Thickness Rectal Prolapse in Young Patients

PURPOSE

Delorme's procedure is infrequently applied in young adults because of its assumed higher recurrence rate. The aim of this prospective study was to assess the efficacy of the Delorme's technique in younger adults.

METHODS

Fifty-two consecutive patients were entered in our study. We followed patients for at least 30 months. Their complaints and clinical exam results were noted.

RESULTS

Our study included 52 patients (mean age, 38.44 years; standard deviation, 13.7 years). Of the included patients, 41 (78.8%) were younger than 50 years of age, and 11 (21.1%) were older than 50 years of age. No postoperative mortalities or major complications were noted. Minor complications were seen in 5 patients (9.6%) after surgery. The mean hospital stay was 2.5 days. In the younger group (age ≤50 years), fecal incontinence was improved in 92.3% (12 out of 13 with previous incontinence) of the patients, and recurrence was seen in 9.75% (4 patients). In the older group (age >50 years), fecal incontinence was improved in 20% (1 out of 5 with previous incontinence) of the patients, and recurrence was seen in 18.2% (2 patients). In 50% of the patients with a previous recurrence (3 out of 6 patients) following Delorme's procedure as a secondary procedure, recurrence was observed.

CONCLUSION

Delorme's procedure, especially in younger patients, is a relatively safe and effective treatment and should not be restricted to older frail patients. This procedure may not be suitable for recurrent cases.

Comparative study between Delorme operation with or without postanal repair and levateroplasty in treatment of complete rectal prolapse

BACKGROUND

Rectal prolapse is a distressing and socially disabling condition. controversy exists regarding the preferred surgical technique for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse.

OBJECTIVE

We compared Delorme operation alone or with postanal repair and levatroplasty in treating complete rectal prolapse.

METHODS

Consecutive patients treated for rectal prolapse at our colorectal unit were evaluated for inclusion. Participants were randomly allocated to receive Delorme operation only (GI), or Delorme operation with postanal repair and levatorplasty (GII).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was recurrence rate; secondary outcomes included improvement of constipation, incontinence, operative time, anal manometery and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Eighty-two consecutive patients with rectal prolapse were randomized. There was a significant difference between the two groups with longer operative time in group II. Recurrence rate after one year was (14.28% in GI, and 2.43% in GII, respectively (P = 0.043). Constipation improved in group I & II but there was a significant difference in constipation scores postoperatively between the two groups. There was improvement in continence mechanism in both groups postoperatively but being higher in group II and this produce a significant statistical difference (0.004). Mean satisfaction score was significantly higher in group II than group I. Both groups succeed to produce a significant change in resting and squeeze pressure before & after the operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Delorme operation seems to be an effective procedure for treating complete rectal prolapse especially if combined with postanal repair and levatorplasty.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01656369.

DeloRes trial: study protocol for a randomized trial comparing two standardized surgical approaches in rectal prolapse - Delorme's procedure versus resection rectopexy

Background

More than 100 surgical approaches to treat rectal prolapse have been described. These can be done through the perineum or transabdominally. Delorme’s procedure is the most frequently used perineal, resection rectopexy the most commonly used abdominal procedure. Recurrences seem more common after perineal compared to abdominal techniques, but the latter may carry a higher risk of peri- and postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Methods/Design

DeloRes is a randomized, controlled, observer-blinded multicenter trial with two parallel groups. Patients with a full-thickness rectal prolapse (third degree prolapse), considered eligible for both operative methods are included. The primary outcome is time to recurrence of full-thickness rectal prolapse during the 24 months following primary surgery. Secondary endpoints are time to and incidence of recurrence of full-thickness rectal prolapse during the 5-year follow-up, duration of surgery, morbidity, hospital stay, quality of life, constipation, and fecal incontinence. A meta-analysis was done on the basis of the available data on recurrence rates from 17 publications comprising 1,140 patients. Based on the results of a meta-analysis it is assumed that the recurrence rate after 2 years is 20% for Delorme’s procedure and 5% for resection rectopexy. Considering a rate of lost to follow-up without recurrence of 30% a total of 130 patients (2 x 65 patients) was calculated as an adequate sample size to assure a power of 80% for the confirmatory analysis.

Discussion

The DeloRes Trial will clarify which procedure results in a smaller recurrence rate but also give information on how morbidity and functional results compare.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trial Number DRKS00000482

Rectal prolapse

Rectal prolapse is a condition that usually requires surgical intervention to correct. Abdominal and perineal approaches are well described in the literature. Abdominal approaches have traditionally been reserved for young healthy patients, but this has been challenged by perineal approaches with excellent outcomes. Laparoscopic techniques have been shown to be effective and equivalent to traditional laparotomy techniques.

Outcome analysis of elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse

PURPOSE

For treatment of rectal prolapse, abdominal approaches are generally offered to younger patients, whereas perineal, less invasive procedures are considered more beneficial in the elderly. The aim of this study was to analyze whether laparoscopic resection rectopexy (LRR) is suitable for older patients.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Patients who received LRR for rectal prolapse were selected from a prospective laparoscopic colorectal surgery database. Perioperative and long-term outcome were compared between patients <75 years old (group A) and ≥75 years old (group B).

RESULTS

Of 154 patients, 111 were in group A and 43 in group B. There was one conversion that occurred in group B. Overall mortality rate was 1.3% (n = 2). Both patients were in group B (group B, 4.7%; p = 0.079). Differences in major and minor complications between the groups were not significant. Rates of improvement for incontinence were 62.7% (group A) and 66.7% (group B; p = 0.716); for constipation, the rates were 78.9% (group A) and 73.3% (group B; p = 0.832). All recurrences occurred in group A (n = 10; overall, 10.3%; group A, 13%). After exclusion of patients who had previously received perineal prolapse surgery, recurrence rate was 3.3% overall (group A, 4.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the benefits of LRR for rectal prolapse in elderly patients. Age per se is not a contraindication for LRR. Elderly patients encounter complications slightly more frequently (although not statistically significant) than younger patients. Therefore, a very careful patient selection in the elderly is of paramount importance. However, the long-term outcome does not seem to differ between younger and elderly patients.

Delorme's Procedure for Complete Rectal Prolapse: Does It Still Have It's Own Role?

PURPOSE

Although there are more than a hundred techniques, including the transabdominal and the perineal approaches, for the repair of the rectal prolapsed, none of them is perfect. The best repair should be chosen not only to correct the prolapse but also to restore defecatory function and to improve fecal incontinence throughout the patient's lifetime. The aim of this retrospective review is to evaluate clinical outcomes of the Delorme's procedure for the management of the complete rectal prolapse.

METHODS

A total of 19 patients (13 females and 6 males) with complete rectal prolapses were treated by using the Delorme's procedure in St. Vincent's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, from February 1997 to February 2007. Postoperative anal incontinence was evaluated using the Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score.

RESULTS

All 19 patients had incontinence to liquid stool, solid stool, and/or flatus preoperatively. Three (15.8%) patients reported recurrence of the rectal prolapse (at 6, 18, 29 months, respectively, after the operation). Information on postoperative incontinence was available for 16 of the 19 patients. Twelve of the 16 patients (75%) reported improved continence (5 [31.3%] were improved and 7 [43.7%] completely recovered from incontinence) while 4 patients had unchanged incontinence symptoms. One (6.3%) patient who did not have constipation preoperatively developed constipation after the operation.

CONCLUSION

The Delorme's procedure is associated with a marked improvement in anal continence, relatively low recurrence rates, and low incidence of postoperative constipation. This allows us to conclude that this procedure still has its own role in selected patients.

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for internal rectal prolapse using biological mesh: postoperative and short-term functional results

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy is a novel procedure to correct internal and external rectal prolapse. Several authors have shown that this approach is safe and improves obstructive defaecation symptoms and faecal incontinence, without inducing new-onset constipation, possible after posterior rectopexy. Over the last decade, as for other procedures, biological meshes are used to correct pelvic floor disorders. Literature data are scant. In this study, we present our experience with this procedure using biological mesh.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospectively collected data on laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for internal rectal prolapse were analysed. All patients underwent preoperative evaluation with defaecating proctography and/or pelvic dynamic MRI, full colonoscopy, anal physiology studies and endo-anal ultrasound. End-points were to evaluate surgical complications and functional results of this technique such as changes in bowel function (Wexner Constipation Score and Faecal Incontinence Severity Index) at 3 and 6 months. Analysis was performed using Mann-Whitney U test for unpaired data and Wilcoxon signed rank test for paired data (two-sided p test).

RESULTS

Thirty-four consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (median age 59, range 25-78 years, mean follow-up was 12 months). Twenty-eight patients (82%) had a constipation score ≥ 5, while 14 (41%) a FISI score ≥ 10. Nine patients (26%) had mixed obstructed defaecation and faecal incontinence. One patient required conversion to open (3%). Median length of stay was 2 days. Overall complication rate was 23.5%. Preoperative constipation (median Wexner score 15) and faecal incontinence (median FISI score 12) improved significantly at 3 months (Wexner 5, FISI 5, both p < 0.001). Two patients experienced prolapse persistence or recurrence. No patients had function worsening or complained of sexual dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy using biological mesh for internal rectal prolapse is safe and effective in ameliorating symptoms of obstructed defaecation and faecal incontinence.

Delorme's Procedure for Complete Rectal Prolapse: Does It Still Have It's Own Role?

Purpose

Although there are more than a hundred techniques, including the transabdominal and the perineal approaches, for the repair of the rectal prolapsed, none of them is perfect. The best repair should be chosen not only to correct the prolapse but also to restore defecatory function and to improve fecal incontinence throughout the patient's lifetime. The aim of this retrospective review is to evaluate clinical outcomes of the Delorme's procedure for the management of the complete rectal prolapse.

Methods

A total of 19 patients (13 females and 6 males) with complete rectal prolapses were treated by using the Delorme's procedure in St. Vincent's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, from February 1997 to February 2007. Postoperative anal incontinence was evaluated using the Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score.

Results

All 19 patients had incontinence to liquid stool, solid stool, and/or flatus preoperatively. Three (15.8%) patients reported recurrence of the rectal prolapse (at 6, 18, 29 months, respectively, after the operation). Information on postoperative incontinence was available for 16 of the 19 patients. Twelve of the 16 patients (75%) reported improved continence (5 [31.3%] were improved and 7 [43.7%] completely recovered from incontinence) while 4 patients had unchanged incontinence symptoms. One (6.3%) patient who did not have constipation preoperatively developed constipation after the operation.

Conclusion

The Delorme's procedure is associated with a marked improvement in anal continence, relatively low recurrence rates, and low incidence of postoperative constipation. This allows us to conclude that this procedure still has its own role in selected patients.

Delorme's Procedure for Full-Thickness Rectal Prolapse; Does it Alter Anorectal Function

Clinical and anorectal manometric results of Delorme's procedure for full-thickness rectal prolapse were assessed retrospectively. Thirty-seven patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse who were operated on with Delorme's procedure were included in the study. They were 11 males and 26 females with mean age of 54 ± 4.4 years (range 15-70 years) and mean follow-up period of 27 ± 4.6 months (15-48 months). The mean operative time was 65 ± 4.5 min (60-90 min); there was no mortality and blood loss was minimal. Mean hospital stay was 3.5 days (2-6 days). Outcomes of the procedure were satisfactory in 29 patients (78.4%). Dissatisfaction came from recurrence and persistence of fecal incontinence. Prolapse recurrence had been observed in six patients; three of them were treated by the same technique and showed no recurrence, and the others were treated by either mucosal resection (1) or abdominal resection rectopexy (2). Constipated patients showed improved symptoms in 7 of 10 cases. Of 11 patients who were incontinent preoperatively, seven patients became fully continent. Postoperatively, anorectal manometric studies (MRP, MSP, MTV, and UDV) showed significant improvement in all patients with intact RAIR. Delorme's operation, coupled with avoidance of abdominal procedures, is the treatment of choice of rectal prolapse in elderly frail patients and in patients with defecatory disorders.

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse is safe and effective in the elderly. Does this make perineal procedures obsolete?

AIM

Perineal approaches are considered to be the 'gold standard' in treating elderly patients with external rectal prolapse (ERP) because morbidity and mortality with perineal approaches are lower compared with transabdominal approaches. Higher recurrence rates and poorer function are tolerated as a compromise. The aim of the present study was to assess the safety of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) in elderly patients, compared with perineal approaches.

METHOD

The prospectively collected databases from two tertiary referral pelvic floor units were interrogated to identify outcome in patients of 80 years of age and older with full-thickness ERP treated by LVR. The primary end-points were age, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grade, mortality, and major and minor morbidity. Secondary end-points were length of stay (LOS) and recurrence.

RESULTS

Between January 2002 and December 2008, 80 [median age 84 (80-97) years] patients underwent rectopexy. The mean ± standard deviation ASA grade was 2.44 (± 0.57) (two patients were ASA grade I, 42 patients were ASA grade II, 35 patients were ASA grade III and one patient was ASA grade IV). The median LOS was 3 (range 1-37) days. There was no mortality, and 10 (13%) patients had complications (one major and nine minor). At a median follow-up of 23 (2-82) months, two (3%) patients had developed a recurrent full-thickness prolapse.

CONCLUSION

LVR is a safe procedure for using to treat full-thickness ERP in elderly patients. Mortality, morbidity and hospital stay are comparable with published rates for perineal procedures, with a 10-fold lower recurrence.

Surgical treatment of rectal prolapse

Rectal prolapse is defined as a protrusion of the rectum beyond the anus. Although rectal prolapse was recognized as early as 1500 BC, the optimal surgical procedure is still debated. The varied operative procedures available for treating rectal prolapsed can be confusing. The aim of treatment is to control the prolapse, restore continence, and prevent constipation or impaired evacuation. In elderly and high-risk patients, perineal approaches, such as Delorme's operation and Altemeier's operation, have been preferred, although the incidence of recurrence and the rate of persistent incontinence seem to be high when compared with transabdominal procedures. Abdominal operations involve dissection and fixation of the rectum and may include a rectosigmoid resection. From the late twentieth century, the laparoscopic procedure has been applied to the treatment of rectal prolapse. Current laparoscopic surgical techniques include suture rectopexy, stapled rectopexy, posterior mesh rectopexy with artificial material, and resection of the sigmoid colon with colorectal anastomosis with or without rectopexy. The choice of surgery depends on the status of the patient and the surgeon's preference.

Complete rectal prolapse in adults: clinical and functional results of delorme procedure combined with postanal repair

This study has been performed at the Department of General Surgery, Zagazig University Hospital and King Saud Hospital, Oniza, KSAduring the period from November 1998 to September 2008.Twentyadult patients (6 males and 14 females with a mean age of 55 years) with complete rectal prolapse were eligible for the study, Where Delorme's procedure and postanal repairwere combined. All patients presented with complete rectal prolapse at least 5 cm in length. The associated disorders included constipation (4 patients, 20%), variable degrees of incontinence (15 patients, 75%). Only one patient had no associated functional problems. The median follow up period was 65 months. There was no mortality and immediate postoperative complications developed in 4 patients (20%). Recurrence of the prolapse occurred in two patient. Eleven patients (73.3%) (11/17) with faecal incontinence showed postoperative improvement and 4 patients failed to improve. The 4 patients presented with constipation were all improved postoperatively. We conclude that the combination of Delorme's procedure and postanal repair in the treatment of complete rectal prolapse in adults is a safe procedure that corrects the anatomical defects and improves the functional outcome. We recommend use of this method in the treatment of complete rectal prolapse especially in the elderly who are complaining of faecal incontinence.

Comparison of perineal operations with abdominal operations for full-thickness rectal prolapse

BACKGROUND

We can divide surgery for rectal prolapse into two broad categories: abdominal and perineal. However, few studies compare the long-term outcomes and quality of life among operations for full-thickness rectal prolapse. The purpose of this study was to compare abdominal (AO) versus perineal (PO) procedures for the treatment of full-thickness rectal prolapse regarding recurrence rate, incontinence, constipation, and quality of life.

METHODS

Records of 177 operations from 1995 to 2001 were reviewed retrospectively. A telephone survey was attempted for all. Seventy-five (42%) responded to the Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS), KESS Constipation Score (KESS-CS), and SF-36 Quality of Life Score. Appropriate statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

For the 122 AO and 55 PO, there were no deaths. Mean follow-up was similar (PO 3.1 vs. AO 3.9 years; P = 0.306). As expected the PO patients were older (mean 69 vs. 55 years) and had higher ASA scores. Those undergoing PO had less procedural blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, and dietary restriction. The PO group also scored worse on the physical component of SF-36 (PO 33 vs. AO 39.6; P = 0.034). However, the rate of recurrent prolapse was significantly higher for the PO (PO 26.5% vs. AO 5.2%; P < 0.001). Complications, CCIS, KESS-CS, and SF-36 mental component were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In full-thickness rectal prolapse, elderly, sick patients are selected for a perineal operation. The morbidity, functional outcomes, and quality of life are acceptable. However, the high recurrence rates make the perineal operation a second-best choice for younger, healthy patients.

Haemorrhoids, rectal prolapse, anal fissure, peri-anal fistulae and sexually transmitted diseases

Anorectal disorders like haemorrhoids, rectal prolapse, anal fissures, peri-anal fistulae and sexually transmitted diseases are bothersome benign conditions that warrant special attention. They, however, can all be diagnosed by inspection or proctoscopy (sexually transmitted proctitis). Constipation can play an underlying role in haemorrhoids, rectal prolapse and anal fissures, and it is important to treat these conditions in order to avoid recurrences. Haemorrhoids and anal fissures are generally treated conservatively and surgery is seldom required. Rectal prolapse and cryptoglandular peri-anal fistulae are treated surgically. In a recurrent peri-anal fistula, the fistular tract needs to be visualised with anal ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). There are different techniques available for this evaluation, and care must be taken not to damage the anal sphincter. Peri-anal fistulae in Crohn's disease are treated conservatively and surgery is only required in cases with abscesses. Sexually transmitted proctitis needs to be adequately recognised and treated according to the infectious agent.

The Delorme repair for full-thickness rectal prolapse: a retrospective review

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to assess our colorectal surgical training program experience with the Delorme procedure for complete rectal prolapse.

METHODS

Consecutive patients were identified from a surgical database and evaluated by chart review.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients with a mean follow-up period of 3.6 years were included. Outcomes included a recurrence rate of 14.5%, an overall complication rate of 25%, and a surgical site-specific complication rate of 8%. For patients younger than 50 years old (mean age, 36 y; range, 19-49 y), the recurrence rate was 8% with a mean follow-up period of 4.1 years. Their total complication rate was 15%, with no surgery site-specific complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results are consistent with previously published experiences in that most preoperative evacuatory symptoms resolve with repair of the prolapse, and serious complications are uncommon. The observation that recurrence and complication rates may be lower in younger medically fit patients suggests the Delorme repair need not be restricted specifically to older, medically unfit patients.

Rectal prolapse, rectal intussusception, rectocele, solitary rectal ulcer syndrome, and enterocele

Rectal prolapse is best diagnosed by physical examination and by having the patient strain as if to defecate; a laparoscopic rectopexy is the preferred treatment approach. Intussusception is more an epiphenomena than a defecatory disorder and should be managed conservatively. Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome is a consequence of chronic straining and therapy should be aimed at restoring a normal bowel habit with behavioral approaches including biofeedback therapy. Rectocele correction may be considered if it can be definitively established that it is a cause of defecation disorder and only after conservative measures have failed. An enterocele should only be operated when pain and heaviness are predominant symptoms and it is refractory to conservative therapy.

Perineal approaches to rectal prolapse

The management of full-thickness rectal prolapse involves surgical intervention in the majority of cases. Many procedures have been described. Perineal procedures are generally reserved for patients with multiple comorbid conditions or those considered too elderly or frail to withstand an abdominal surgical approach. They also play an important role in the management of rectal mucosal prolapse. The techniques, advantages, and complications of perineal approaches to rectal prolapse in use today are the focus of this chapter.

Rectal prolapse

INTRODUCTION

Rectal prolapse, or procidentia, is defined as a protrusion of the rectum beyond the anus. It commonly occurs at the extremes of age. Rectal prolapse frequently coexists with other pelvic floor disorders, and patients have symptoms associated with combined rectal and genital prolapse. Few patients, a lack of randomized trials and difficulties in the interpretation of studies of anorectal physiology have made the understanding of this disorder difficult.

METHODS OF TREATMENT

Surgical management is aimed at restoring physiology by correcting the prolapse and improving continence and constipation, whereas in patients with concurrent genital and rectal prolapse, an interdisciplinary surgical approach is required. Operation should be reserved for those patients in whom medical treatment has failed, and it may be expected to relieve symptoms. Numerous surgical procedures have been suggested to treat rectal prolapse. They are generally classified as abdominal or perineal according to the route of access. However, the controversy as to which operation is appropriate cannot be answered definitively, as the extent of a standardized diagnostic assessment and the types of surgical procedures have not been identified in published series.

LITERATURE REVIEW

This review encompasses rectal prolapse, including aetiology, symptoms and treatment. The English-language literature about rectal prolapse was identified using Medline, and additional cited works not detected in the initial search were obtained. Articles reporting on prospective and retrospective comparisons and case reports were included.

[Rectal prolapse. Abdominal or perineal approach? Current situation]

Rectal prolapse is a major challenge for the surgeon who has to resolve the anatomical problem and the functional disturbances in the same procedure. Abdominal procedures are the most appropriate in young patients, and the most common technique is rectopexia with or without resection. The use of mesh or sutures provides the same results and the choice depends on the surgeon's preference. Laparoscopic surgery has been demonstrated to have similar efficacy to conventional surgery and may become the option of the future. The perineal approach is the best option in elderly patients and in those with associated morbidity; the Delorme technique is simple to carry out, but rectosigmoidectomy provides better results.

Rectal procidentia: diagnosis and management

Rectal prolapse or procidentia is a common condition with detrimental effects on continence and social function. One of the most devastating complications for patients suffering from this disorder is fecal incontinence. The psychologic trauma these patients experience can be debilitating. This article provides an overview of rectal procidentia, including a review of the symptomatic presentation, etiology, classification, diagnosis, and treatment.

Long-term results of Delorme's procedure and Orr-Loygue rectopexy to treat complete rectal prolapse

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess long-term outcome of Orr-Loygue rectopexy and Delorme's procedures in total rectal prolapse management.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively from 1978 to 2001. Statistical analysis was performed by chi-squared test and Student's t -test.

RESULTS

One hundred nine patients underwent either a Orr-Loygue rectopexy (49 patients) or a Delorme's procedure (60 patients). Mean follow-up was 88 (range, 1-300) months. In the rectopexy group, the overall complication rate and the recurrence rate were 33 percent and 4 percent, respectively. In patients with preoperative constipation, this symptom was improved or completely resolved in 33 percent and worsened in 58 percent postoperatively. Seventy-three percent of patients with preoperative incontinence were continent or had continence improvement postoperatively. In Delorme's group, overall complication and recurrence rates were 15 percent and 23 percent, respectively. Mortality was 7 percent. In patients with preoperative constipation, this symptom was improved or completely resolved in 54 percent and worsened in 12.5 percent of patients postoperatively. Forty-two percent of patients with preoperative incontinence were continent or had continence improvement postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, Orr-Loygue rectopexy had a lower long-term recurrence rate. However, this surgical procedure is associated with a higher complication rate. We believe that Delorme's procedure is still a valuable option in selected patients with postoperative minimal morbidity but higher recurrence rate.

External pelvic rectal suspension (the Express procedure) for full-thickness rectal prolapse: evolution of a new technique

OBJECTIVE

The Délorme's operation for rectal prolapse is a safe procedure but has a high recurrence rate. We aimed to develop an operation akin to it, but designed to reduce this deficit.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-one consecutive patients with rectal prolapse were included in the study. Initially, a conventional Délorme's procedure was performed and sutures or strips of Gore-Tex were attached circumferentially to the apex of the prolapse, tunneled subcutaneously, and anchored to the external surface of the pelvis. Subsequently, the procedure was modified. Acellular porcine collagen strips were used and buried within the apex without plication of the denuded rectal musculature. Patients were formally assessed preoperatively and four months postoperatively by symptom and quality of life questionnaires and subsequently by regular clinical review.

RESULTS

In the Gore-Tex group (N = 11; males:females = 10:1; mean age, 61 years) three patients underwent suture repair and eight had strip fixation. All suture repairs developed sepsis and one patient had a recurrence. Seven of the strip fixations (88 percent) developed sepsis that resulted in implant extrusion. There was one full-thickness and one mucosal recurrence after a median follow-up of 25 months. In the collagen group (N = 20; males:females = 2:18; mean age, 63 years), sepsis occurred in four patients, requiring surgical intervention in one patient (5 percent) (cf Gore-Tex group, P = 0.002). There was one mucosal and three full-thickness (15 percent) recurrences after a median follow-up of 14 months (cf Gore-Tex group, P = not significant). Significant improvements in symptom and quality of life scores were recorded in both groups at four months.

CONCLUSION

A new, minimally invasive perineal procedure for rectal prolapse has been developed and initial data testify to its relative safety provided collagen is used. It remains to be seen whether long-term recurrence rates will be lower than those of conventional perineal procedures.

Der Rektumprolaps des Erwachsenen

The etiology of rectal prolapse is unclear. Diagnosis is easy by local inspection. The ideal surgery would repair the prolapse, correct any functional problems such as incontinence or constipation, be minimally invasive and cost-effective, and result in minimal morbidity and recurrence. The best surgical repair remains controversial-whether by the transanal/perineal or abdominal approach-with or without resection and rectopexy. There are no prospective-randomized studies that convincingly answer the numerous questions. The best possible option today seems to be the abdominal/laparoscopic method with a resection rectopexy according to Frykman and Goldberg.

Rectal prolapse: which surgical option is appropriate?

Numerous surgical procedures have been suggested to treat rectal prolapse. In elderly and high-risk patients, perineal approaches such as Delorme's procedure and perineal rectosigmoidectomy (Altemeier's procedure) have been preferred, although the incidence of recurrence and the rate of persistent incontinence seem to be high when compared with transabdominal procedures. Functional results of transabdominal procedures, including mesh or suture rectopexy and resection-rectopexy, are thought to be associated with low recurrence rates and improved continence. Transabdominal procedures, however, usually imply rectal mobilization and fixation, colonic resection, or both, and some concern is voiced that morbidity, in terms of infection or leakage, and mortality could be increased. If we focus on surgical outcome, our own experience of laparoscopic resection-rectopexy for rectal prolapse shows that the laparoscopic approach is safe and effective, and functional results with respect to recurrence are favorable. However, the controversy "which operation is appropriate?" cannot be answered definitely, as a clear definition of rectal prolapse, the extent of a standardized diagnostic assessment, and the type of surgical procedure have not been identified in published series. Randomized trials are needed to improve the evidence with which the optimal surgical treatment of rectal prolapse can be defined.

Surgical intervention for adult patients with rectal prolapse

This review describes the pathogenesis, diagnosis, preoperative testing, and surgical decision making involved in the management of full-thickness rectal protrusion in adults. Historic and current procedures are described in detail. No one procedure is favored over others, and selection depends on the individual characteristics of the patient.

Prosthetic rectopexy to the pelvic floor and sigmoidectomy for rectal prolapse

BACKGROUND

Full thickness rectal prolapse in young adults with normal pelvic floor is a disease in which the rectum is exceedingly long and mobile. Surgical treatment should correct both anatomical defects by combined rectopexy and colonic resection, which is expected to be less constipating than rectopexy alone. The aim of this study was to describe an original procedure of rectopexy to the pelvic floor with prosthetic material combined with sigmoid resection, and to evaluate prospectively anatomical and functional results.

METHODS

Thirty-five patients (30 women) of median age 44 years (range 18 to 74) were operated on for full thickness rectal prolapse with normal pelvic floor. The rectum was mobilized posteriorly without division of the lateral ligaments and attached to the pelvic floor previously repaired with a nonabsorbable mesh. The sigmoid colon was resected with hand-sewn anastomosis. Clinical results were assessed by a questionnaire.

RESULTS

There were no deaths or any septic or anastomotic complications. Small bowel obstruction was corrected laparoscopically in 1 patient. Mean hospital stay was 8 days (range 6 to 14). Mean follow-up was 34 months (range 10 to 93). No recurrence was seen. Preoperatively, 33 patients (94%) complained of constipation mainly with emptying problems (21 patients) and 25 patients (71.5%) were incontinent. Postoperatively, no constipated or incontinent patient's condition worsened. Rectal emptying was restored in 17 patients (81%). Eighteen incontinent patients (72%) regained full continence. On the other hand, 2 patients with normal bowel function worsened and 1 patient with an altered rectal compliance after Delorme's operation became incontinent.

CONCLUSIONS

In young adults with rectal prolapse and normal pelvic floor undergoing prosthetic rectopexy and sigmoid resection (a) morbidity was low, (b) anatomical control was obtained in all cases, (c) emptying problems were corrected, and (d) deleterious effects are likely to occur if they had no constipation before operation or if rectal compliance was previously altered.

Rectal prolapse, rectal intussusception, rectocele, and solitary rectal ulcer syndrome

Rectal prolapse can be diagnosed easily by having the patient strain as if to defecate. A laparoscopic rectopexy should be recommended. Intussusception is more an epiphenomenon than a cause of defecatory disorder and should be managed conservatively. Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome is a consequence of chronic straining, and therapy should include restoring a normal defecation habit. Rectocele should be left alone; an operation may be considered if it is larger than 3 cm and is causing profound symptoms despite maximizing medical therapy for the associated defecation disorder.

Evaluation and outcome of the delorme procedure in the treatment of rectal outlet obstruction

PURPOSE

This study was designed to assess the results of the Delorme procedure in the treatment of patients with rectal outlet obstruction.

METHODS

A descriptive retrospective study from October 1989 to October 1997 was undertaken. Thirty-four patients with an abnormal defecography documenting rectal outlet obstruction caused by internal rectal prolapse or a combination of internal rectal prolapse and rectocele were included in the study.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients (33 females) ages 35 to 82 (mean, 61.4) years were followed up for the duration of the study (mean follow-up, 43 months). Twenty-six patients (76.4 percent) reported a good to excellent overall result after the Delorme procedure. Eight patients (23.6 percent) reported fair to poor results. Symptomatic improvement was observed in 89.7 percent for patients who had incomplete evacuation, and in 88.5 percent of patients who had constipation. There was improvement in 78.6 percent of patients with bleeding per rectum, in 92.9 percent of patients with straining, and in 82.4 percent of patients with the need to manually assist in defecation by pushing in the perineum or vagina. Discontinuation of laxative use after the procedure was reported by 66.7 percent of patients. Improvement in the patients with some degree of incontinence was seen in 33.3 percent. Twelve patients (35.3 percent) experienced one or more complications. The procedure was performed in an outpatient setting in 71 percent of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The Delorme procedure for the treatment of rectal outlet obstruction can be done with minimal morbidity, short hospital stay often in an outpatient setting, with good functional results, and with an overall patient satisfaction above 75 percent.

Evaluation of Delorme's procedure as a treatment for full-thickness rectal prolapse

BACKGROUND

Delorme's procedure is a well tolerated perineal operation for full-thickness rectal prolapse. However, prolapse recurrence is common and reported recurrence rates vary widely. This study attempted to standardize outcome assessment for recurrence following primary and subsequent Delorme's operations. Patient and operative factors were analysed to identify any that might improve patient selection.

METHODS

Some 101 primary and 17 secondary Delorme's procedures were carried out on 113 consecutive patients presenting with rectal prolapse, who were followed for a minimum of 12 months, unless death or recurrent prolapse intervened. The rate of prolapse recurrence was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method of analysis. Patient age, sex, grade of incontinence, presence of diverticular disease, length of mucosal resection and position in the operative series were analysed to identify factors affecting recurrence.

RESULTS

The predicted recurrence-free period for 50 per cent of patients undergoing primary and secondary Delorme's procedures was 91 (95 per cent confidence interval 77-105) and 27 (15-39) months respectively. None of the patient or operative factors analysed was related to recurrent prolapse.

CONCLUSION

Delorme's procedure is a simple operation with satisfactory functional results which can be considered in all patients of all ages. However, high recurrence rates for primary and repeat operations should be explained to patients when planning their surgical management.

The best operation for rectal prolapse

Rectal prolapse remains a disorder for which the cause is not clearly understood and the best method of management is debated. Because the natural history of prolapse frequently leads to complications of incontinence and constipation, we believe that all patients presenting with internal and external prolapse should be considered for repair. Although the type of operative repair recommended may vary, it is clear that all patients with external rectal prolapse should be offered some type of repair. What is not clear from the literature is the appropriate management of those patients with internal prolapse. As shown in the George Washington University experience, surgery is rarely performed for isolated internal prolapse. Most patients who present with internal prolapse also have an associated enterocele, rectocele, or cystocele. Repair of the internal prolapse and the associated disorder may benefit many of these patients. If internal prolapse is an isolated finding, it is not clear to what extent the prolapse is responsible for the patient's symptoms, and repair is generally not advised. These guidelines are easy to enumerate but may be difficult to practice in some patients. Therefore, ongoing evaluation of clinical results is critical to improve our understanding of these disorders. This discussion has outlined the current theories of the cause of rectal prolapse, the symptoms and findings patients present with, and the possible approaches to repair.