The ideal surgical procedure for full-thickness rectal prolapse should be one of minimal morbidity, effective in improving symptoms, and durable over time with a low risk of recurrence. Unfortunately, as evident from the myriad number of surgical options for prolapse, it is not surprising that recurrence continues to plague the colorectal surgeon. Recurrence rates vary widely in the literature (older reports as high as 50%), and the variation is widely perceived to reflect the different technical aspects involved with each procedure . Some authors suggest, however, that surgical technique does not fully account for the variation in recurrence rates, especially among abdominal approaches . Instead, differences are more likely explained by nonuniform definitions of recurrent prolapse and varying lengths of follow-up . Nevertheless, it is generally accepted that recurrence following an abdominal repair (0–10%) is less common than after a perineal approach (0–25%) –.
KeywordsRectal Prolapse Abdominal Approach Recurrent Prolapse Perineal Approach Pudendal Nerve Terminal Motor Latency
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 7.Bullard Dunn K, Madoff R (2007) Rectal Prolapse. In: Wexner S, Stollman N (eds) Diseases of the colon. Informa Healthcare, New York, pp 81–97Google Scholar
- 18.Delaney CP, Senagore AJ (2005) Rectal Prolapse. In: Fazio VW, Church JM, Delaney CP (eds) Current therapy in colon and rectal surgery, 2nd edn. Elsevier Mosby, Philadelphia, pp 125–134Google Scholar
- 33.Starr KW (1953) Recurrent rectal prolapse; an operative method of treatment. Med J Aust 40:190Google Scholar