A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of medical treatments for the management of solitary rectal ulcer syndrome

Efficacy of surgical treatments for the management of solitary rectal ulcer syndrome: a network meta-analysis

AIM

Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS) is a benign and poorly understood disorder with complex management. Typical symptoms include straining during defaecation, rectal bleeding, tenesmus, mucoid secretion, anal pain and a sense of incomplete evacuation. Diagnosis is based on characteristic clinical symptoms and endoscopic/histological findings. Several treatments have been reported in the literature with variable ulcer healing rates. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of different treatments for SRUS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies in English, French and Spanish languages were included. Papers written in other languages were excluded. Other exclusion criteria were reviews, case reports or clinical series enrolling less than five patients, study duplications, no clinical data of interest and no article available. A systematic literature search was conducted from January 2000 to March 2024 using the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. The biases of the studies were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale or the Jadad scale when appropriate. Types of treatment and their efficacy for the cure of SRUS were collected and critically assessed. The study's primary outcome was to estimate the rate of patients with ulcer healing.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies with 911 patients (men 361, women 550) diagnosed with SRUS were analysed in the final meta-analysis. The pooled effect estimates of treatment efficacy revealed that surgery showed the highest ulcer healing rate (70.5%; 95% CI 0.57-0.83). Surgery was superior in the cure of ulcers with respect to medical therapies and biofeedback (OR 0.09 and OR 0.14).

CONCLUSION

Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome is a challenging clinical entity to manage. Proficient results have been reported with the surgical approach, suggesting its positive role in cases refractory to medical and biofeedback therapy. Further studies in homogeneous populations are required to evaluate the efficacy of surgery in this setting. (PROSPERO registration number CRD42022331422).

Solitary Rectal Ulcer Syndrome Mimicking Perianal Crohn's Disease

Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS) is an uncommon condition that presents with non-specific symptoms shared by other disease processes. This case report shares a unique presentation in which a patient was thought to have fistulous perianal Crohn's disease then underwent treatment with infliximab but was ultimately found to have SRUS. The prognosis and treatment of SRUS vary greatly from inflammatory bowel disease. Making the correct diagnosis is imperative when considering Crohn's disease and its mimickers. 

Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS) is a rare disease which can puzzle the gastroenterologist. A review of the syndrome and new treatment options are discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Its association with dyssynergia in general supports an important role for pelvic floor biofeedback, which can be successful in patients with SRUS. No other novel.

SUMMARY

Awareness of this benign syndrome is important; endoscopic diagnosis and histological confirmation opens the way to a guided lifestyle therapy with regulation of defecation and pelvic floor biofeedback. A reluctance to proceed to surgery seems warranted. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Management of solitary rectal ulcer syndome: Results of a french national survey: Société Nationale Française de Coloproctologie SNFCP, France

There is no consensus on the treatment for solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS). This study aimed to obtain information from physicians treating patients with SRUS in a French medical surgical society to facilitate management plans and to develop a support algorithm. Members of the French National Society of Coloproctology (SNFCP) were invited to complete a survey that included twenty items about therapeutic management and healing criteria. Overall, 91 practitioners (median age: 52 [42-59] years) responded to the questionnaire; 64/91 (70.3%) were proctologists, and 27/91 (29.7%) were colorectal surgeons. Only 15 members (16.5%) followed more than 5 patients with SRUS per year. The therapeutic objectives were to improve both patient symptoms (100%) and quality of life (98.9%). Laxative treatment and first-line rehabilitation were agreed upon by 83.5% and 73% of the respondents, respectively. Surgery, mainly rectopexy, was offered after failed medical treatment by 81.1% of the practitioners (79.1%). The first-line strategy preferred by the professionals included laxatives and biofeedback rehabilitation. Surgical treatment, preferably rectopexy, was proposed as a second intervention. No consensus was reached regarding other therapeutic alternatives, and additional studies are required to clarify their indications.