Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Functional and sexual outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy vs transperineal mesh repair in the treatment of rectocele: a retrospective analysis

  • original article
  • Published:
European Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Aim

This study aimed to compare functional outcomes and quality of life, between transperineal mesh repair (TPMR) and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) in the treatment of rectocele.

Methods

Consecutive women with symptomatic rectocele without associated internal rectal prolapse or enterocele who underwent TPMR (n = 15) or LVMR (n = 20) from January 2013 to February 2019 were included. This study was a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. Patient demographics and postoperative complications were evaluated. Altomare’s obstructed defecation (OD) and Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Scores (CCIS), Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QoL), Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) were compared before, 3 months, and 12 months after surgery.

Results

The median follow-up was 49 (range 13–65) and 28 (range 13–60) months in the TPMR (mean age 47.8 ± 11.7, years) and LVMR (mean age of 52.4 ± 9.9 years) cohort, respectively. Incontinence, OD, and PAC-QoL scores significantly improved at 3 and 12 months after surgery in both groups. FSFI did not deteriorate 3 and 12 months after LVMR. FSFI scores significantly improved 3 months after TPMR, but a significant deterioration was observed 12 months after TPMR. A gradual increase observed for SF-36 3 months after surgery in both groups, and six of the eight subscale scores improved at 12 months, but social functioning in both groups and vitality in the TPMR group returned to baseline scores.

Conclusıons

TPMR and LVMR improved defecation. Sexual function was not worsened after LVMR, and some individual domains of FSFI worsened after TPMR.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Podzemny V, Pescatori LC, Pescatori M. Management of obstructed defecation. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(4):1053–60. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v21.i4.1053.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Mustain WC. Functional disorders: rectocele. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2017;30(1):63–75. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1593425.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Watson SJ, Loder PB, Halligan S, Bartram CI, Kamm MA, Phillips RK. Transperineal repair of symptomatic rectocele with marlex mesh: a clinical, physiological and radiological assessment of treatment. J Am Coll Surg. 1996;183:257–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jia X, Glazener C, Mowatt G, et al. Efficacity and safety of using mesh or grafts in surgeryfor anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall prolaps: systematicreview and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2008;115:1350–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Zimmermann EF, Hayes RS, Daniels IR, Smart NJ, Warwick AM. Transperineal rectocele repair: a systematic review. ANZ J Surg. 2017;87:773–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. D’Hoore A, Cadoni R, Penninckx F. Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse. Br J Surg. 2004;91:1500–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wong MT, Abet E, Rigaud J, Frampas E, Lehur PA, Meurette G. Minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy for complex rectocoele: impact on anorectal and sexual function. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13:320–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wong M, Meurette G, Abet E, Podevin J, Lehur PA. Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for complex rectocele. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13:1019–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Consten EC, van Iersel JJ, Verheijen PM, Broeders IA, Wolthuis AM, D’Hoore A. Long-term outcome after laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: an observational study of 919 consecutive patients. Ann Surg. 2015;262:742–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370:1453–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Altomare DF, Spazzafumo L, Rinaldi M, Dodi G, Ghiselli R, Piloni V. Set-up and statistical validation of a new scoring system for obstructed defaecation syndrome. Colorectal Dis. 2008;10:84–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jorge JM, Wexner SD. Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 1993;36:77–97.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bengi G, Yalçın M, Akpınar H, Keskinoğlu P, Ellidokuz H. Validity and reliability of the patient assessment of constipation quality of life questionnaire for the Turkish population. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2015;26:309–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kocyigit H, Aydemir O, Fisek G, et al. Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of short form-36 (SF-36). Turk J Drugs Ther. 1999;199(12):102–6.

  16. Aygin D, Aslan EF. Turkis validation of the female sexual function index. Turk Clin J Med Sci. 2005;25:393–9.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Leventoglu S, Mentes BB, Akin M, Karen M, Karamercan A, Oguz M. Transperineal rectocele repair with polyglycolic acid mesh: a case series. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50:2085–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gultekin FA. Short term outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal and complex pelvic organ prolapse: case series. Turk J Surg. 2019;35:91–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Formijne Jonkers HA, Poierrié N, Draaisma WA, Broeders IA, Consten EC. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for rectal prolapse and symptomatic rectocele: an analysis of 245 consecutive patients. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:695–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gouvas N, Georgiou PA, Agalianos C, et al. Ventral colporectopexy for overt rectal prolapse and obstructed defaecation syndrome: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis. 2015;17:O34–O46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Collinson R, Wijffels N, Cunningham C, Lindsey I. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for internal rectal prolapse: short-term functional results. Colorectal Dis. 2010;12:97–104.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Mercer-Jones MA, D’Hoore A, Dixon AR, et al. Consensus on ventral rectopexy: report of a panel of experts. Colorectal Dis. 2014;16:82–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Franceschilli L, Varvaras D, Capuano I, et al. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biologic mesh for the treatment of obstructed defecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse: a critical appraisal of the first 100 cases. Tech Coloproctol. 2015;19:209–19.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Lisi G, Campanelli M, Grande S, Grande M, Mascagni D, Milito G. Transperineal rectocele repair with biomesh: updating of a tertiary refer center prospective study. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018;33:1583–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Smart NJ, Mercer-Jones MA. Functional outcome after transperineal rectocele repair with porcine dermal collagen implant. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50:1422–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Boons P, Collinson R, Cunningham C, Lindsey I. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse improves constipation and avoids de novo constipation. colorectal Dis. 2010;12(6):526–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Laganà AS, La Rosa VL, Rapisarda AMC, Vitale SG. Pelvic organ prolapse: the impact on quality of life and psychological well-being. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;39:164–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mäkelä-Kaikkonen J, Rautio T, Ohinmaa A, et al. Cost-analysis and quality of life after laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for posterior compartment prolapse: a randomized trial. Tech Coloproctol. 2019;23:461–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Balata M, Elgendy H, Emile SH, Youssef M, Omar W, Khafagy W. Functional outcome and sexual-related quality of life after transperineal versus transvaginal repair of anterior rectocele: a randomized clinical trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2020;63:527–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Farid M, Madbouly KM, Hussein A, Mahdy T, Moneim HA, Omar W. Randomized controlled trial between perineal and anal repairs of rectocele in obstructed defecation. World J Surg. 2010;34:822–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kahn MA, Stanton SI. Posterior colporraphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104:882–6.

    Google Scholar 

  32. D’Hoore A, Vanbeckevoort D, Penninckx F. Clinical, physiological and radiological assessment of rectovaginal septum reinforcement with mesh for complex rectocele. br J Surg. 2008;95:1264–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Abed H, Rahn DD, Lowenstein L, et al. Incidence and management of graft erosion, wound granulation, and dyspareunia following vaginal prolapse repair with graft materials: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22:789–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Smart NJ, Pathak S, Boorman P, et al. Synthetic or biological mesh use in laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy—a systematic review. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:650–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Ogilvie JW Jr, Stevenson ARL, Powar M. Case-matched series of a non-cross-linked biologic versus non-absorbable mesh in laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2014;29:1477–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Albayati S, Morgan MJ, Turner CE. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for rectal prolapse and rectal intussusception using a biological mesh. colorectal Dis. 2017;19:857–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Gurland B. Ventral mesh rectopexy: is this the new standard for surgical treatment of pelvic organ prolapse? dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:1446–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our administrative nurse Ahu Uzun Arslantas who helped in data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. General Surgery Department, Faculty of Medicine, Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University, 67600, Kozlu, Zonguldak, Turkey

    Fatma Ayca Gultekin M.D. Int-FASCRS, FEBS-C

  2. Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University, Kozlu, Zonguldak, Turkey

    Furuzan Kokturk

Authors
  1. Fatma Ayca Gultekin M.D. Int-FASCRS, FEBS-C
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Furuzan Kokturk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fatma Ayca Gultekin M.D. Int-FASCRS, FEBS-C.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

F.A. Gultekin and F. Kokturk declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants or on human tissue were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1975 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the local ethics committee (No. 202019). Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gultekin, F.A., Kokturk, F. Functional and sexual outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy vs transperineal mesh repair in the treatment of rectocele: a retrospective analysis. Eur Surg 53, 231–239 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10353-021-00695-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10353-021-00695-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation