Temporary successful results of ventral rectopexy for enterocele surgical correction, about 138 patients

Analysis of factors that indicated surgery in 400 patients submitted to a complete diagnostic workup for obstructed defecation syndrome and rectal prolapse using a supervised machine learning algorithm

BACKGROUND

Patient selection is extremely important in obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) and rectal prolapse (RP) surgery. This study assessed factors that guided the indications for ODS and RP surgery and their specific role in our decision-making process using a machine learning approach.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a long-term prospective observational study on female patients reporting symptoms of ODS who underwent a complete diagnostic workup from January 2010 to December 2021 at an academic tertiary referral center. Clinical, defecographic, and other functional tests data were assessed. A supervised machine learning algorithm using a classification tree model was performed and tested.

RESULTS

A total of 400 patients were included. The factors associated with a significantly higher probability of undergoing surgery were follows: as symptoms, perineal splinting, anal or vaginal self-digitations, sensation of external RP, episodes of fecal incontinence and soiling; as physical examination features, evidence of internal and external RP, rectocele, enterocele, or anterior/middle pelvic organs prolapse; as defecographic findings, intra-anal and external RP, rectocele, incomplete rectocele emptying, enterocele, cystocele, and colpo-hysterocele. Surgery was less indicated in patients with dyssynergia, severe anxiety and depression. All these factors were included in a supervised machine learning algorithm. The model showed high accuracy on the test dataset (79%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Symptoms assessment and physical examination proved to be fundamental, but other functional tests should also be considered. By adopting a machine learning model in further ODS and RP centers, indications for surgery could be more easily and reliably identified and shared.

Mesh-related complications and recurrence after ventral mesh rectopexy with synthetic versus biologic mesh: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) is a widely accepted surgical treatment for rectal prolapse. Both synthetic and biologic mesh are used. No consensus exists on the preferred type of mesh material. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to establish an overview of the current literature on mesh-related complications and recurrence after VMR with synthetic or biologic mesh to aid evidence-based decision making in preferred mesh material.

METHODS

A systematic search of the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane was performed (from inception until September 2020). Studies evaluating patients who underwent VMR with synthetic or biologic mesh were eligible. The MINORS score was used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were eligible after qualitative assessment. Eleven studies reported on mesh-related complications including 4001 patients treated with synthetic mesh and 762 treated with biologic mesh. The incidence of mesh-related complications ranged between 0 and 2.4% after synthetic versus 0-0.7% after biologic VMR. Synthetic mesh studies showed a pooled incidence of mesh-related complications of 1.0% (95% CI 0.5-1.7). Data of biologic mesh studies could not be pooled. Twenty-nine studies reported on the risk of recurrence in 2371 synthetic mesh patients and 602 biologic mesh patients. The risk of recurrence varied between 1.1 and 18.8% for synthetic VMR versus 0-15.4% for biologic VMR. Cumulative incidence of recurrence was found to be 6.1% (95% CI 4.3-8.1) and 5.8% (95% CI 2.9-9.6), respectively. The clinical and statistical heterogeneity was high.

CONCLUSIONS

No definitive conclusions on preferred mesh type can be made due to the quality of the included studies with high heterogeneity amongst them.

Factors Predicting the Presence of Concomitant Enterocele and Rectocele in Female Patients With External Rectal Prolapse

Purpose

External rectal prolapse (ERP) is frequently associated with other pelvic disorders, such as enterocele, rectocele, and perineal descent. Evacuation proctography makes it possible to visualize the development of such anatomical abnormalities. The aim of this study was to identify the variables that would predict associated abnormalities in patients with ERP.

Methods

Between February 2010 and August 2019, 124 female patients with ERP, who were evaluated using proctography were included in this study. Enterocele was diagnosed when the extension of the loop of the small bowel was located between the vagina and rectum. A significant rectocele was defined as >20 mm in diameter. Multivariate analysis was used to establish which morphological parameters best predicted the presence of enterocele or rectocele.

Results

Sixty-five patients had ERP alone, while 59 patients (47.6%) had additional findings on proctography. The most frequently associated abnormality was enterocele with 48 of the patients (38.7%) having this condition. Rectocele was detected in 17 of the 124 patients (13.7%). The median length of the ERP was 30 mm (range, 7 to 147 mm). The results of the stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that a history of hysterectomy and the length of the ERP were significantly associated with the presence of enterocele. The analysis showed that the longer the prolapse, the higher the incidence of enterocele. A history of hysterectomy was also significantly associated with the presence of rectocele.

Conclusion

Patients with ERP often have associated anatomical abnormalities and should be investigated thoroughly before planning surgical treatment.

Extraperineal enterocele in male: A case report and literature review

INTRODUCTION

Enterocele is a herniation of the small bowel through the cul-de-sac. It is uncommon and most often seen in elder females. Large enterocele manifesting as rectal prolapse is exceedingly rare and only few cases are reported previously. Due to it rarity, the best surgical treatment is not yet established especially in male patients. We present a case of enterocele causing rectal prolapse in a male patient that was treated surgically.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 47-year-old African American male with chronic constipation and straining presented with manually reducible rectal prolapse. A defecography revealed a large enterocele prolapsing through the anterior rectal wall. The patient underwent an open posterior suture rectopexy with peritoneoplasty. His symptoms completely resolved after surgery, and repeat defecography three months after the procedure showed no sign of recurrence.

DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

Extraperineal enterocele in male is a rare disease. Rectopexy with peritoneoplasty can provide a great symptom relieve and improvement on defecography. Long-term outcome should be evaluated.

Chronic pelvic pain and rectal prolapse invite consideration of enterocele

AIM

Data on the pathogenesis and symptoms of enterocele are limited. The objectives of this study were to determine the clinical phenotype of patients with enterocele, to highlight the main functional and/or anatomical associations and to improve the accuracy of the preoperative assessment of pelvic floor disorders.

METHOD

A total of 588 patients who were referred to a tertiary unit for an anorectal complaint completed a self-administered questionnaire and underwent physical examination, anorectal manometry and defaecography. Using defaecography, enterocele was defined as a radiological hernia of the small bowel into an enlarged rectovaginal space. One hundred and thirty-five patients with enterocele were age- and gender-matched with 270 patients without enterocele. Factors associated with enterocele were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis models.

RESULTS

Patients with enterocele were less frequently obese than patients without enterocele (8/135 vs 36/270; P = 0.02) and more frequently had a past history of pelvic surgery (51/135 vs 75/270; P = 0.04). They complained more frequently of pelvic pain on bearing down (29/135 vs 24/270; P = 0.003), anal procidentia (37/135 vs 46/270; P = 0.01) and more frequently had irritable bowel syndrome (83/135 vs 131/270; P = 0.01) and severe constipation according to the Kess score (104/135 vs 182/270; P = 0.04). Anorectal function was comparable between the two groups. Patients with enterocele had more frequent rectoceles and overt rectal prolapses than patients without enterocele.

CONCLUSIONS

Enterocele should be investigated in patients with chronic pelvic pain, overt rectal prolapse and/or a past history of pelvic surgery.