Impact of new technologies on the clinical and functional outcome of Altemeier's procedure: a randomized, controlled trial

Is it possible to reduce recurrences after Altemeier's procedure for complete rectal prolapse? Twenty-year experience in 130 consecutive patients

PURPOSE

In the attempt to understand the reasons for and to find a solution to the high recurrence rate after perineal surgery for complete rectal prolapse, we retrospectively analysed the long-term results of Altemeier's procedure alone, or associated with Trans-Obturator Colonic Suspension (TOCS) in a large series of patients with a median interval of 84 months (range 6-258).

METHODS

Medical records of 110 patients undergoing Altemeier with levatorplasty (group 1) and 20 patients submitted to the same procedure associated with TOCS (group 2) for newly diagnosed complete rectal prolapse were reviewed. All patients had been recruited after preoperative clinical examination, SF-36 quality of life, continence score and colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Mortality was nil. The overall complication and the recurrence rates were 12.3%, and 15.0% (P= 0.769) and 24.6% and 5.0% (P=0.067) in group 1 and 2, respectively. Twelve patients of group 1 with a recurrence were submitted to a redo-Altemeier, 8 to a redo-Altemeier associated with TOCS, and 6 associated with an anterior coloplasty with a mesh. The only patient of group 2 with a recurrence was submitted to a Hartmann's operation. Preoperative vs postoperative mean (SD) continence score was 15.8 (3.1) and 15.6 (3.3) versus 4.1 (1.8) and 3.9 (1.9) in group 1 and 2, respectively (P < 0.001). All parameters of SF-36 improved after surgery (P<0.01) and no differences between the 2 groups were found CONCLUSIONS: Long-term results confirmed the safety and effectiveness of Altemeier's procedure for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse, with the limit of a non-negligible incidence of anastomotic complications and recurrences. The combination of Altemeier with TOCS showed a positive trend to a reduction of the recurrence rate, not worsening morbidity and outcomes.

Surgical Treatment of Rectal Prolapse in the Laparoscopic Era; A Review of the Literature

Rectal prolapse is associated with debilitating symptoms including the discomfort of prolapsing tissue, mucus discharge, hemorrhage, and defecation disorders of fecal incontinence, constipation, or both. The aim of treatment is to eliminate the prolapse, correct associated bowel function and prevent new onset of bowel dysfunction. Historically, abdominal procedures have been indicated for young fit patients, whereas perineal approaches have been preferred in older frail patients with significant comorbidity. Recently, the laparoscopic procedures with their advantages of less pain, early recovery, and lower morbidity have emerged as an effective tool for the treatment of rectal prolapse. This article aimed to review the current evidence base for laparoscopic procedures and perineal procedures, and to compare the results of various techniques. As a result, laparoscopic procedures showed a relatively low recurrence rate than the perineal procedures with comparable complication rates. Laparoscopic resection rectopexy and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy had a small advantage in the improvement of constipation or the prevention of new-onset constipation compared with other laparoscopic procedures. However, the optimal surgical repair has not been clearly demonstrated because of the significant heterogeneity of available studies. An individualized approach is recommended for every patient, considering age, comorbidity, and the underlying anatomical and functional disorders.

Perineal resectional procedures for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Several procedures for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse (CRP) exist. These procedures are performed via the abdominal or perineal approach. Perineal procedures for rectal prolapse involve either resection or suspension and fixation of the rectum. The present review aimed to assess the outcomes of the perineal resectional procedures including Altemeier procedure (AP), Delorme procedure (DP), and perineal stapled prolapse resection (PSR) in the treatment of CRP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A systematic search of the current literature for the outcomes of perineal resectional procedures for CRP was conducted. Databases queried included PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library. The main outcomes of the review were the rates of recurrence of CRP, improvement in bowel function, and complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies involving 2647 (2390 females) patients were included in the review. The mean age of patients was 69.1 years. Recurrence of CRP occurred in 16.6% of patients. The median incidences of recurrence were 11.4% for AP, 14.4% for DP, and 13.9% for PSR. Improvement in fecal incontinence occurred in 61.4% of patients after AP, 69% after DP, and 23.5% after PSR. Complications occurred in 13.2% of patients. The median complication rates after AP, DP and PSR were 11.1%, 8.7%, and 11.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Perineal resectional procedures were followed by a relatively high incidence of recurrence, yet an acceptably low complication rate. Definitive conclusions on the superiority of any procedure cannot be reached due to the significant heterogeneity of the studies.

Use of the Harmonic scalpel for Delorme's procedure

AIM

There are many surgical techniques that deal with external rectal prolapse but perineal procedures have the advantage of reduced invasiveness. Therefore, despite concerns regarding high recurrence rates, the technique is still used by many surgeons.

METHOD

This manuscript and video describe our early clinical experience using the Harmonic scalpel in 11 consecutive patients who underwent a Delorme's procedure for external rectal prolapse.

RESULTS

The median age of patients was 76 (range: 30-94) years. There were no intra-operative complications, and the median operative time was 78 min. Intra-operative blood loss was minimal (mean 45 ml; range 20-70 ml). Median length of stay was 2 (range: 0-8) days. Overall morbidity and recurrence were both 18%, with a median follow-up of 15 (range: 1-23) months. Nine patients were operated on by a senior trainee with consultant supervision.

CONCLUSION

The advantages of this device are mainly those of ease of mucosal dissection, minimal blood loss and shorter operative time in comparison with published series.

Primary and repeated perineal stapled prolapse resection

BACKGROUND

Previous studies of the outcome after perineal stapled prolapse resection (PSPR) have included a limited number of patients with a short follow-up and high recurrence rates. The present study was designed to assess the initial results, complications, recurrence rate, and outcomes up to 4 years after PSPR, as well as the need for a repeated procedure.

METHODS

Fifty-four consecutive patients with rectal prolapse (mean age 77.2 years, range 46-93 years; n = 3 men) were selected for PSPR between May 2009 and February 2015. Prolapse length was measured at baseline and after surgery. Patients were asked to grade intensity of symptoms as a satisfaction score of 1-10, 10 representing being symptom-free.

RESULTS

The mean operation time was 45.3 min (SD = 17.5, range 25-95 min). The mean rectal prolapse length was reduced significantly from 9.5 cm (SD = 5.0, range 4-30 cm) to 1.2 cm (SD = 2.6, range 0-10 cm; p < 0.0001). Bleeding requiring surgical intervention occurred in two patients (3.7%). Postoperative satisfaction score increased from a mean of 2.2 (SD = 0.9) to a mean of 6.4 (SD = 2.8, p ≤ 0.0001). After a mean follow-up of 13.4 months (SD = 14.1), six patients with recurrence underwent a new PSPR and five patients underwent colostomy, mainly because of incontinence, resulting in a recurrence rate of 20.4%. There were no complications after redo PSPR, and after a median of 10-month follow-up (range 6-37), there were no recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

PSPR is a rather new surgical procedure for external rectal prolapse. Immediate complications are few and not serious. Although recurrences can be treated with a second PSPR, the operation may only be the best option for old and fragile patients with comorbidities and a short life expectancy.

Surgery for complete (full-thickness) rectal prolapse in adults

BACKGROUND

Complete (full-thickness) rectal prolapse is a lifestyle-altering disability that commonly affects older people. The range of surgical methods available to correct the underlying pelvic floor defects in full-thickness rectal prolapse reflects the lack of consensus regarding the best operation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different surgical repairs for complete (full-thickness) rectal prolapse.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register up to 3 February 2015; it contains trials from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) as well as trials identified through handsearches of journals and conference proceedings. We also searched EMBASE and EMBASE Classic (1947 to February 2015) and PubMed (January 1950 to December 2014), and we specifically handsearched theBritish Journal of Surgery (January 1995 to June 2014), Diseases of the Colon and Rectum (January 1995 to June 2014) and Colorectal Diseases (January 2000 to June 2014), as well as the proceedings of the Association of Coloproctology meetings (January 2000 to December 2014). Finally, we handsearched reference lists of all relevant articles to identify additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of surgery for managing full-thickness rectal prolapse in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected studies from the literature searches, assessed the methodological quality of eligible trials and extracted data. The four primary outcome measures were the number of patients with recurrent rectal prolapse, number of patients with residual mucosal prolapse, number of patients with faecal incontinence and number of patients with constipation.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 RCTs involving 1007 participants in this third review update. One trial compared abdominal with perineal approaches to surgery, three trials compared fixation methods, three trials looked at the effects of lateral ligament division, one trial compared techniques of rectosigmoidectomy, two trials compared laparoscopic with open surgery, and two trials compared resection with no resection rectopexy. One new trial compared rectopexy versus rectal mobilisation only (no rectopexy), performed with either open or laparoscopic surgery. One new trial compared different techniques used in perineal surgery, and another included three comparisons: abdominal versus perineal surgery, resection versus no resection rectopexy in abdominal surgery and different techniques used in perineal surgery.The heterogeneity of the trial objectives, interventions and outcomes made analysis difficult. Many review objectives were covered by only one or two studies with small numbers of participants. Given these caveats, there is insufficient data to say which of the abdominal and perineal approaches are most effective. There were no detectable differences between the methods used for fixation during rectopexy. Division, rather than preservation, of the lateral ligaments was associated with less recurrent prolapse but more postoperative constipation. Laparoscopic rectopexy was associated with fewer postoperative complications and shorter hospital stay than open rectopexy. Bowel resection during rectopexy was associated with lower rates of constipation. Recurrence of full-thickness prolapse was greater for mobilisation of the rectum only compared with rectopexy. There were no differences in quality of life for patients who underwent the different kinds of prolapse surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The lack of high quality evidence on different techniques, together with the small sample size of included trials and their methodological weaknesses, severely limit the usefulness of this review for guiding practice. It is impossible to identify or refute clinically important differences between the alternative surgical operations. Longer follow-up with current studies and larger rigorous trials are needed to improve the evidence base and to define the optimum surgical treatment for full-thickness rectal prolapse.

Recurrence after perineal rectosigmoidectomy: when and why?

AIM

Reported recurrence rates after perineal rectosigmoidectomy (Altemeier's procedure) in patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse vary from 0% to 60%. The object of this study was to analyse risk factors for recurrence after this procedure.

METHOD

From May 2004 to December 2012, 63 consecutive patients suffering from full-thickness rectal prolapse undergoing perineal rectosigmoidectomy were included. Of these 46 were female and the median age of the whole group was 79 (30-90) years. The median follow-up was 53 (3-99) months. Patient characteristics and operative parameters were compared between patients with and without recurrence.

RESULTS

One patient died and another patient needed re-operation. Eight full-thickness recurrences occurred in eight patients after a median of 18 (6-48) months. Stapled compared with handsewn anastomosis (hazard ratio 7.96, 95% confidence interval 1.90-33.47; P = 0.001) and shorter specimen length (hazard ratio 4.06, 95% confidence interval 0.97-16.99; P = 0.03) increased the risk of recurrence in Cox regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

The operative technique including stapled anastomosis and length of the resected specimen seems to be associated with a high recurrence rate after perineal rectosigmoidectomy.

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.

Rectal prolapse: an overview of clinical features, diagnosis, and patient-specific management strategies

Rectal prolapse can present in a variety of forms and is associated with a range of symptoms including pain, incomplete evacuation, bloody and/or mucous rectal discharge, and fecal incontinence or constipation. Complete external rectal prolapse is characterized by a circumferential, full-thickness protrusion of the rectum through the anus, which may be intermittent or may be incarcerated and poses a risk of strangulation. There are multiple surgical options to treat rectal prolapse, and thus care should be taken to understand each patient's symptoms, bowel habits, anatomy, and pre-operative expectations. Preoperative workup includes physical exam, colonoscopy, anoscopy, and, in some patients, anal manometry and defecography. With this information, a tailored surgical approach (abdominal versus perineal, minimally invasive versus open) and technique (posterior versus ventral rectopexy +/- sigmoidectomy, for example) can then be chosen. We propose an algorithm based on available outcomes data in the literature, an understanding of anorectal physiology, and expert opinion that can serve as a guide to determining the rectal prolapse operation that will achieve the best possible postoperative outcomes for individual patients.

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.

PROSPER: a randomised comparison of surgical treatments for rectal prolapse

AIM

Rectal prolapse is a profoundly disabling condition, occurring mainly in elderly and parous women. There is no accepted standard surgical treatment, with previous studies limited in methodological quality and size. PROSPER aimed to address these deficiencies by comparing the relative merits of different procedures.

METHOD

In a pragmatic, factorial (2 × 2) design trial, patients could be randomised between abdominal and perineal surgery (i), and suture vs resection rectopexy for those receiving an abdominal procedure (ii) or Altemeier's vs Delorme's for those receiving a perineal procedure (iii). Primary outcome measures were recurrence of the prolapse, incontinence, bowel function and quality of life scores (Vaizey, bowel thermometer and EQ-5D) measured up to 3 years.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-three patients were recruited: 49 were randomised between surgical approaches (i); 78 between abdominal procedures (ii); and 213 between perineal procedures (iii). Recurrence rates were higher than anticipated, but not significantly different in any comparison: Altemeier's vs Delorme's 24/102 (24%) and 31/99 (31%) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81; 95% CI 0.47, 1.38; P = 0.4]; resection vs suture rectopexy 4/32 (13%) and 9/35 (26%) (HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.14, 1.46; P = 0.2); perineal vs abdominal 5/25 (20%) and 5/19 (26%) (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.24, 2.86; P = 0.8). Vaizey, bowel thermometer and EQ-5D scores were not significantly different in any of the comparisons.

CONCLUSION

No significant differences were seen in any of the randomised comparisons, although substantial improvements from baseline in quality of life were noted following all procedures.

Perineal rectosigmoidectomy for primary and recurrent rectal prolapse: are the results comparable the second time?

BACKGROUND

The surgical approach to recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse after perineal rectosigmoidectomy is complicated by recurrent prolapse. The majority of patients who undergo perineal rectosigmoidectomy are elderly with comorbidities. Therefore, redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy is usually selected to avoid postoperative complications.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy for recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

This study was conducted at Cleveland Clinic Florida, from January 2000 to March 2009.

PATIENTS

One hundred thirty-six patients (129 women), mean age 78 (range, 31-98) years, were included in the study; 113 patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse underwent primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy, and 23 patients with recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse underwent redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy.

INTERVENTIONS

All patients underwent perineal rectosigmoidectomy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Perioperative outcomes, recurrence curves, and risk of recurrence were compared between the 2 groups. Age, anterior compartment prolapse, concurrent levatorplasty, and length of bowel resection were analyzed to identify factors potentially influencing recurrence.

RESULTS

Both groups had comparable demographics, BMI, and ASA scores. Operative time, blood loss, length of bowel resection, hospital stay, and follow-up (mean, 42.5 months) were similar in both groups. There was no significant difference in overall complication rates (redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy 17.4% vs. primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy 16.8%; p = 1.00). The recurrence rate for full-thickness rectal prolapse was significantly higher for redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy than primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy (39% vs. 18%; p = 0.007). None of the factors analyzed was associated with recurrence in either group.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective methodology. In addition, functional outcomes were not evaluated, because many of the patients died during the follow-up period or were unavailable because of advanced age.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy is as safe and feasible as primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy in elderly and fragile patients with recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse. However, the re-recurrence rate for full-thickness rectal prolapse is substantially higher for redo perineal rectosigmoidectomy than primary perineal rectosigmoidectomy.

Trans-obturator colonic suspension during Altemeier's operation for full-thickness rectal prolapse: preliminary results with a new technique

AIM

With the aim of reducing recurrence after perineal surgery for full-thickness rectal prolapse, a new operation consisting of a trans-obturator colonic suspension during Altemeier's operation has been developed.

METHOD

Eighteen women with full-thickness rectal prolapse were examined clinically, with validated quality of life and continence scores, colonoscopy, anorectal manometry, anal EMG and sacral reflex latency. Ten had a newly diagnosed and eight a recurrent prolapse. The Altemeier operation was combined with a levatorplasty in all cases using two porcine collagen prostheses sutured to the descending colon and passed through the trans-obturator space bilaterally. The operation was completed by a manual or stapled colo-anal anastomosis. Clinical examination, with quality of life and continence scores, anorectal manometry, EMG and sacral reflex latency, was scheduled during follow up, with the recurrence of prolapse as the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

There were no recurrences at 30 months. There was no mortality and no complications. All patients experienced significant improvement in quality of life and faecal continence scores (P<0.01). Surgery did not affect anorectal pressures or sacral reflex latencies.

CONCLUSION

The new technique appears to be relatively easy to perform and is complication free with no recurrence after a short period of follow up. A larger study with appropriate controls and longer follow up is now needed to assess its real effectiveness in reducing the risk of recurrence.

Complications after rectal prolapse surgery: does approach matter?

BACKGROUND

Data comparing surgical outcomes following abdominal and transperineal approaches for rectal prolapse are limited.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify differences in postoperative complications following abdominal vs transperineal approaches to rectal prolapse.

DESIGN

We studied a retrospective cohort in the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from January 2005 through December 2008.

PATIENTS

We identified all patients who underwent surgical treatment for rectal prolapse.

INTERVENTION

We compared surgical outcomes of standard abdominal approaches compared with standard transperineal approaches to rectal prolapse.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the validated morbidity outcomes and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1485 patients underwent rectal prolapse surgery (706 abdominal and 779 transperineal). Patients treated with abdominal approaches had significantly higher rates of infectious (9.8% vs 3.7%) and overall (12.9% vs 7.6%) complications in comparison with those treated with transperineal approaches. On multivariate analysis, risk factors for overall complications were ASA class 4 (OR 6.4) and abdominal surgery (OR 2.3), whereas an albumin level of ≥ 2.5 was protective (OR 0.05). Significant predictors of infectious complications were ASA class 4 (OR 7.5), BMI >25 (OR 1.8), and rectal prolapse surgery performed with an abdominal approach (OR 2.8).

LIMITATIONS

The retrospective design introduces potential selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Abdominal surgery for rectal prolapse is a predictor of both infectious and overall complications. Patients with significant comorbidities or a high BMI are at particularly high risk for complications and may be better suited for a transperineal rather than abdominal approach for the treatment of rectal prolapse.

Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous systematic reviews comparing stapled and handsewn colorectal anastomosis that are available in the medical literature have not shown either technique to be superior. An update of this systematic review was performed to find out if there are any data that properly answer this question.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety and effectiveness of stapled and handsewn colorectal anastomosis surgery. The following primary hypothesis was tested: the stapled technique is more effective because it decreases the level of complications.

SEARCH METHODS

A computerized search was performed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE according to the strategies of the Colorectal Cancer Group of The Cochrane Collaboration. There were no limits upon language, date or other criteria. A revised search strategy was performed for this updated version of the review May 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which stapled and handsewn colorectal anastomosis techniques were compared. Participants were adult patients undergoing elective colorectal anastomosis surgery. The interventions were endoluminal circular stapler and handsewn colorectal anastomosis surgery. Outcomes considered were a) mortality; b) overall anastomotic dehiscence; c) clinical anastomotic dehiscence; d) radiological anastomotic dehiscence; e) stricture; f) anastomotic haemorrhage; g) reoperation; h) wound infection; i) anastomosis duration; and j) hospital stay.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were independently analysed by the two review authors (CBN, SASL) and cross-checked. The methodological quality of each trial was assessed by the same two authors. After searching the literature for this update, no study was added to those in the previous version of this review. Details of randomizations (generation and concealment), blinding, whether an intention-to-treat analysis was done or not, and the number of patients lost to follow-up were recorded. The analysis of the risk of bias was updated according to the software Review Manager 5.1. The results of each RCT were summarized on an intention-to-treat basis in 2 x 2 tables for each outcome. External validity was defined by the characteristics of the participants, interventions and the outcomes. The RCTs were stratified according to the level of colorectal anastomosis. The risk difference (RD) method (random-effects model) and number needed to treat (NNT) for dichotomous outcome measures and weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes measures, with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI), were presented in this review. Statistical heterogeneity was evaluated using a funnel plot and the Chi(2) test.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 1233 patients enrolled in nine identified trials, 622 were treated with staples and 611 with manual suture. The following main results were obtained. a) Mortality, result based on 901 patients: RD -0.6%, 95% CI -2.8% to +1.6%. b) Overall dehiscence, result based on 1233 patients: RD 0.2%, 95% CI -5.0% to +5.3%. c) Clinical anastomotic dehiscence, result based on 1233 patients: RD -1.4%, 95% CI -5.2 to +2.3%. d) Radiological anastomotic dehiscence, result based on 825 patients: RD 1.2%, 95% CI -4.8% to +7.3%. e) Stricture, result based on 1042 patients: RD 4.6%, 95% CI 1.2% to 8.1%; NNT 17, 95% CI 12 to 31. f) Anastomotic haemorrhage, result based on 662 patients: RD 2.7%, 95% CI -0.1% to +5.5%. g) Reoperation, result based on 544 patients: RD 3.9%, 95% CI 0.3% to 7.4%. h) Wound infection, result based on 567 patients: RD 1.0%, 95% CI -2.2% to +4.3%. i) Anastomosis duration, result based on one study (159 patients): WMD -7.6 minutes, 95% CI -12.9 to -2.2 minutes. j) Hospital stay, result based on one study (159 patients): WMD 2.0 days, 95% CI -3.27 to +7.2 days.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence found was insufficient to demonstrate any superiority of stapled over handsewn techniques in colorectal anastomosis surgery, regardless of the level of anastomosis. There were no randomised clinical trials comparing these two types of anastomosis in elective conditions in the last decade. The relevance of this research question has possibly lost its strength where elective surgery is concerned. However, in risk situations, such as emergency surgery, trauma and inflammatory bowel disease, new clinical trials are needed.

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.

The Altemeier procedure for rectal prolapse: an operation for all ages

PURPOSE

Perineal rectosigmoidectomy was the most popular operation performed for rectal prolapse in the first half of the 20th century. However, high recurrence rates relegated it to a back-up role for elderly or other high-risk patients who were not candidates for an abdominal operation. Recent series (combined with levatorplasty = Altemeier procedure) revealed excellent results across a broader spectrum of patients and inspired this ongoing consecutive series of cases.

METHODS

This is a review of 103 (99 women) consecutive patients (mean age, 68.9 y; range, 20-97 y) who underwent the Altemeier procedure between 2000 and 2009. Patients were placed in the prone jackknife position: 93 patients (90%) with the use of general anesthesia and 10 patients (10%) with the use of spinal anesthesia. The mean follow-up was 43 months (range, 3 mo to 10 y).

RESULTS

The mean time for the operation was 97.7 minutes (range, 50-180 min) with a mean 7.2 cm of rectum resected (range, 2.5-26.7 cm). The mean blood loss was 66.9 mL (range, 0-350 mL). The mean time to tolerating a diet was 2.3 days (100% within 4 d) and mean postoperative length of hospital stay was 4.2 days (93% within 6 d). There was no mortality, minimal morbidity (14%), and no recurrence. Preoperative constipation (61% of patients) improved in 94% and preoperative fecal incontinence (47% of patients) improved in 85%, whereas 15% developed new onset of seepage or incontinence to flatus.

CONCLUSIONS

The Altemeier procedure for rectal prolapse provided excellent results across all age groups with minimal morbidity, allowing for short hospital stays and periods of convalescence. To this point, there has been no evidence of recurrence in this group of patients, pending longer periods of follow-up, especially among patients from the younger age groups.

Common transperineal surgical options for rectal prolapse

Rectal prolapse is a troublesome anorectal disorder. Surgical procedures for rectal prolapse contain transabdominal and transperineal approaches. There are hundreds of transabdominal approaches currently available for treatment of rectal prolapse. In contrast, only tens of transperineal approaches available for the disease, such as Delorme procedure, Altemeier prodecure, Thiersch prodecure and Gant-Miwa prodecure. Procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) represents the latest advance in transperineal treatment of rectal prolapse. Injection treatment is applied widely in China and has remarkable superiority. As each procedure has its strength and weakness, selection of appropriate procedure based on individual difference can greatly improve surgical outcome. Individualized diagnosis and treatment plan may represent a new direction for transperineal surgical treatment of rectal prolapse.

Quality of life after transperineal rectosigmoidectomy

Background

This study evaluated continence, constipation and quality of life before and after perineal rectosigmoidectomy for full-thickness rectal prolapse.

Methods

Consecutive patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse undergoing perineal rectosigmoid- ectomy (Altemeier's procedure) between May 2004 and June 2008 were studied. A standardized questionnaire, including the Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score (CCCS), Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS) and quality of life scores (EuroQol—Five Dimensions, EuroQol—Visual Analogue Scale and Patient Assessment of Constipation—Quality of Life (PAC-QOL)), was administered before and after operation.

Results

Thirty-eight patients (32 women) of mean(s.d.) age 75(13) years underwent rectosigmoid- ectomy. Seven patients developed postoperative complications and one died. There was one recurrence 5 months after surgery. Twenty-nine patients completed the follow-up questionnaire and were reviewed after a median of 24 (range 6–48) months. Constipation and incontinence were significantly improved after surgery (mean CCCS from 10·21 to 3·58 and CCIS from 14·17 to 11·42; P &lt; 0·001). Quality of life, in terms of mobility, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression, were significantly better at follow-up (P &lt; 0·001), as was subjective health status (P &lt; 0·001). The PAC-QOL score improved significantly in all dimensions (P &lt; 0·001).

Conclusion

Transperineal rectosigmoidectomy improves general and constipation-related quality of life with good functional results.

Modified perineal stapled rectal resection with Contour Transtar for full-thickness rectal prolapse

OBJECTIVE

We report a modified technique of perineal proctectomy using a new reloadable curved cutter stapler, the Contour Transtar (Ethicon Endo-Surgery), to treat full-thickness external rectal prolapse.

METHOD

Between May and July 2008 three female patients were treated. All had a full-thickness external rectal prolapse up to 10 cm in length. The prolapse was initially divided by a linear cutter in anterior and posterior flaps, and resection of the prolapse was performed with a Contour Transtar stapler.

RESULTS

There was no mortality or early or late morbidity. Follow-up was 2-4 months. All patients had a bowel movement within 3 days of the operation, oral feeding started immediately and the hospital stay was 5 days in all cases. All patients reported an improvement of constipation and continence.

CONCLUSION

Our procedure may be indicated for full-thickness prolapse with a rectal protrusion up to 10 cm, as it allows a simple resection without any mobilization or dissection of the rectum. The technique is safe, easier and faster to perform than conventional perineal rectosigmoidectomy.

Long-term outcome of Altemeier's procedure for rectal prolapse

INTRODUCTION

Altemeier's procedure is infrequently applied in European countries and because of the small number of patients treated in each center, its long-term reliability is uncertain.

METHODS

Medical records of 93 patients (median age, 77 years) undergoing perineal rectosigmoidectomy associated with levatorplasty in 72 patients (78 percent) were reviewed; 65 patients (70 percent) suffered from major fecal incontinence.

RESULTS

There was no postoperative mortality. Eight (8.6 percent) major complications were observed (3 pelvic hematomas, 1 anastomotic dehiscence, 1 sigmoid perforation, 1 pararectal abscess, and 2 late anal strictures), and 13 (14 percent) minor complications. At a mean follow-up of 41 (range, 12-112) months the complete recurrence rate was 18 percent (17 patients); these patients were treated with a repeat Altemeier's procedure (6 patients), Delorme's operation (1 patient), Wells' rectopexy (1 patient), postanal repair (1 patient), anal bulking agents (2 patients), and sacral nerve stimulation (2 patients). Anal manometry significantly improved postoperatively. Incontinence improved postoperatively in 30 cases (28 percent), deteriorated in 2 patients, while 4 patients developed minor incontinence.

CONCLUSIONS

Perineal rectosigmoidectomy for rectal prolapse is a relatively safe and effective treatment, in particular, for frail, older patients, with a low postoperative morbidity, but the recurrence rate is not negligible and restoration of continence is unpredictable.

Prolapse of the rectum, long-term results of surgical treatment

AIMS

This study evaluates patency and functional results of abdominal and perineal treatment approaches to prolapse of the rectum.

METHODS

A database search identified patients operated upon for prolapse of the rectum. The operations were abdominal or perineal approaches. The patient's records were reviewed, patients alive were contacted, and a self-report form evaluated functional results. Patients were followed until the prolapse recurred.

RESULTS

A primary operation for prolapse of the rectum was performed in 56 patients. Median age was 59 years (range 20-87) and 78 (40-91) for abdominal and perineal approaches, respectively (p < 0.001). The average length of the prolapses was 8.7 cm (2-25) and 8.6 cm (2-15) for abdominal or perineal approaches. All prolapses treated with a Thiersch's operation recurred within a few months and all prolapses treated with the Delorme's operation recurred within 5 years, whereas the 5-year patency of the abdominal approach was 93% (p < 0.001). No prolapses recurred after mesh rectopexy and the 5-year patency of resection rectopexy was 86%. The abdominal approaches improved stool evacuation and constipation significantly, and anal leakage improved somewhat (p = 0.065). The median hospital stay was 11 (4-20) and 7 (2-155) days after abdominal and perineal approaches (p = 0.003). Complications occurred in 20% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The patency of abdominal approach to prolapse of the rectum is better than that of perineal repairs. The abdominal approaches also have a favorable effect on constipation and anal insufficiency. Perineal approaches should be reserved for patients with a very short life expectancy.

Perineal stapled prolapse resection: a new procedure for external rectal prolapse

PURPOSE

A perineal approach to treating rectal prolapse is ideal for frail patients. Recently, internal rectal redundancy has been successfully treated with transanal resection using the Contour Transtar stapler. This technique has been modified to the perineal stapled prolapse resection. The surgical technique and the preliminary results of the new procedure for external rectal prolapse are presented.

METHODS

Patients not suited for transabdominal treatment were included prospectively for perineal stapled prolapse resection in two colorectal centers. Feasibility, complications, and reinterventions were assessed.

RESULTS

In 14 of 15 patients, perineal stapled prolapse resection was performed without complications in a median operating time of 33 (range, 22-52) minutes. One procedure was changed to an Altemeier because of a staple line disruption. Two patients required reintervention as a result of postoperative hemorrhage. No other severe complications occurred. At follow-up, all patients were well and showed no early recurrence of prolapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Perineal stapled prolapse resection is a new surgical procedure for external rectal prolapse, which is easy and quick to perform. Functional results and long-term recurrence rate must be investigated further.

Surgery for complete rectal prolapse in adults

BACKGROUND

Complete rectal prolapse is a life-style altering disability that commonly affects older people. The range of surgical methods available to correct the underlying pelvic floor defects in complete rectal prolapse suggests that there is no agreement about the choice of the best operation.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of surgery on the treatment of rectal prolapse in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 10 January 2008), the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Trials Register (searched 10 January 2008), CENTRAL (Issue 1, 2008), PubMed (1 January 1950 to 10 January 2008) and EMBASE (1 January 1998 to 10 January 2008). The British Journal of Surgery (January 1995 to January 2008) and the Diseases of the Colon and Rectum (January 1995 to January 2008) were specifically hand searched. The proceedings of the Association of Coloproctology meetings held from 1999 to 2007 were perused. Reference lists of all relevant articles were searched for further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials of surgery in the management of adult rectal prolapse.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three reviewers independently selected studies from the literature searches, assessed the methodological quality of eligible trials and extracted data. The four primary outcome measures were: number of patients with recurrent rectal prolapse, number of patients with residual mucosal prolapse, and number of patients with faecal incontinence or constipation.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve randomised controlled trials including 380 participants were identified and included in this review. One trial compared abdominal with perineal approaches to surgery, three trials compared fixation methods, three trials looked at the effects of lateral ligament division, one trial compared techniques of rectosigmoidectomy, two trials compared laparoscopic with open surgery and two trials compared resection with no resection rectopexy.The heterogeneity of the trial objectives, interventions and outcomes made analysis difficult. Many review objectives were covered by only one or two studies with small numbers of participants. With these caveats in mind there is insufficient data to say which of the abdominal and perineal approaches has a better outcome. There were no detectable differences between the methods used for fixation during rectopexy. Division, rather than preservation, of the lateral ligaments was associated with less recurrent prolapse but more post-operative constipation. Laparoscopic rectopexy was associated with fewer post-operative complications and shorter hospital stay than open rectopexy. Bowel resection during rectopexy was associated with lower rates of constipation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The small sample size of included trials together with their methodological weaknesses severely limit the usefulness of this review for guiding practice. It is impossible to identify or refute clinically important differences between the alternative surgical operations. Larger rigorous trials are needed to improve the evidence with which to define optimum surgical treatment for rectal prolapse: the results of one such trial are awaited.

Treatment of hemorrhoids in day surgery: stapled hemorrhoidopexy vs Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy

BACKGROUND

Recently, it has been demonstrated that surgical treatment of hemorrhoids in a day-care basis is possible and safe. The aim of this study was to compare the Longo stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) and the Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy (MMH).

METHODS

One hundred seventy one patients (95 cases in SH group and 76 cases in MMH group) entered the study: 83 cases were III degree hemorrhoids, 88 IV degree. A priori and a post hoc power analysis were performed. Results, prospectively collected, were compared using chi squared test and student t test. Visual analog scale was used for pain evaluation. Postoperative pain, duration of pain, wound secretion, bleeding, resumption of a normal lifestyle, and postoperative complication were evaluated.

RESULTS

Surgical time was 28.41+/-10.78 for MMH and 28.30+/-13.28 min in SH (P=0.94). Postoperative pain was not different between MMH and SH during the first two postoperative days (4.73+/-2.91 vs 5.1+/-3.048; P=0.4), during the following 6 days, patients treated with SH had less pain (4.63+/-2.04 in MMH vs 3.60+/-2.35 in SH; P=0.006). In the SH group, seven patients needed further hospital stay for complicated course. SH showed higher incidence of anal fissure compared with MMH (6.3% vs 0%; P=0.025) but no differences in urinary retention, anal stricture, urgency, or anal hemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that SH is associated with less postoperative pain and shorter postoperative symptoms, compared with MMH. SH may be a viable addition to the therapy for hemorrhoids with some advantages in early postoperative pain and some disadvantages in postoperative complications and costs.

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.