Advertisement

Invited Commentary

  • Andrew P. Zbar

Abstract

The chapter by Murad-Regadas, Pinto and Wexner comprehensively centers the place of the common abdominal procedures for the treatment of rectal prolapse, particularly examining the role of more minimally invasive approaches. The emergence of some of these newer technologies has, somewhat paradoxically, made the choice for patients presenting with full-thickness rectal prolapse a little more complicated, since there is scarce prospective trialling of some of these novel techniques with any durable outcomes available. I believe that the authors make the case on available literature for primary laparoscopic use when there are no contraindications. Despite recent meta-analysis showing similarities between laparoscopic and open arms of retrospectively analyzed and non-randomized data for morbidity and mortality, with an advantage of shorter hospital stay in the laparoscopic groups [1], there are still few available prospectively randomized clinical trials comparing the two main techniques.

Keywords

Rectal Prolapse Internal Anal Sphincter Pudendal Nerve Terminal Motor Latency Rectal Dissection Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sajid M, Siddiqui M, Baig M. Open versus laparoscopic repair of full thickness rectal prolapse: a re-meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis 2009; 13 April epub ahead of print.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hong D, Lewis M, Tabet J, Anvari M. Prospective comparison of laparoscopic versus open resection for benign colorectal disease. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2002;12:238–242.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Byrne CM, Smith SR, Solomon MJ et al. Long-term functional outcomes after laparoscopic and open rectopexy for the treatment of rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 2008;51:1597–1604.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Laubert T, Kleemann M, Schorcht A et al. Laparoscopic resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a single-center study during 16 years. Surg Endosc 2010;23 February 3pub ahead of print.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vijay V, Halbert J, Zissimopoulos A et al. Day case laparoscopic rectopexy is feasible, safe and cost effective for selected patients. Surg Endosc 2008;22:1237–1240.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Livanage CA, Rathnayake G, Deen KI. A new technique for suture rectopexy without resection for rectal prolapse. Tech Coloproctol 2009;13:27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wetta LA, Gerten KA, Wheeler TL 2nd et al. Synthetic graft use in vaginal prolapse surgery: objective and subjective outcomes. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2009; 20:1307–1312.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Slawik S, Soulsby R, Carter H et al. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy, posterior colporrhaphy and vaginal sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of recto-genital prolapse and mechanical outlet obstruction. Colorectal Dis 2008;10:138–143.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    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;95:1264–1272.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pikarsky AJ, Joo JS, Wexner SD et al. Recurrent rectal prolapse: what is the next good option? Dis Colon Rectum 2000;43:1273–1276.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sanchez JE, Rasheid SH, Krieger BR et al. Laparoscopicassisted transvaginal approach for sigmoidectomy and rectocolpopexy. JSLS 2009;13:217–220.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gurland B, Garrett KA, Firoozi F, Goldman HB. Transvaginal sacrospinous rectopexy: initial clinical experience. Tech Coloproctol 2010;23 March epub ahead of print.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Akl MN, Long JB, Giles DL et al. Robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy: technique and learning curve. Surg Endosc 2009;23:2390–2394.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Muffly T, McCormick TC, Dean J et al. An evaluation of knot integrity when tied robotically and conventionally. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;200:e18–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zbar AP. Innovations in coloproctology. Tech Coloproctol 2009;13:331–332.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cuthbertson AM. Concealed rectal prolapse. Aust N Z J Surg 1980;50:116–117.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pescatori M, Zbar A. Tailored surgery for internal and external rectal prolapse: functional results of 268 patients operated upon by a single surgeon over a 21 year period. Int J Colorectal Dis 2009;11:410–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Phillips RKS. Rectal prolapse — update on the PROSPER trial. Royal Australian College of Surgeons Annual Scientific Congress, 2004. A N Z J Surg 2004;74(suppl):A37(CR 33).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zbar AP, Nguyen H. Management guidelines for full-thickness rectal prolapse. In: Altomare D, Pucciani F (eds) Rectal prolapse. Springer-Verlag, Milan, 2008: pp 201–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Raftopoulos Y, Senagore AJ, Di Giuro G, Bergamaschi R; Rectal Prolapse Recurrence Study Group. Recurrence rates after abdominal surgery for complete rectal prolapse: a multicenter pooled analysis of 643 individual patient data. Dis Colon Rectum 2005;48:1200–1206.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rianuswan W, Hull TL, Bast J et al. Comparison of perineal operations with abdominal operations for full-thickness rectal prolapse. World J Surg 2010;34:1116–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wijffels NA, Collinson R, Cunningham C, Lindsey I. What is the natural history of internal rectal prolapse? Colorectal Dis 2009;13 April epub ahead of print.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sun WM, Read NW, Donnelly TC et al. A common pathophysiology for full thickness rectal prolapse, anterior mucosal prolapse and solitary rectal ulcer. Br J Surg 1989;76:290–295.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zbar AP, Takashima S, Hasegawa T, Kitabayashi K. Perineal rectosigmoidectomy (Altemeier’s procedure): a review of physiology, technique and outcome. Tech Coloproctol 2002;6:109–116.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Williams JG, Wong WD, Jenzen L et al. Incontinence and rectal prolapse: a prospective manometric study. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:209–216.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Birnbaum EH, Stamm L, Rafferty JF et al. Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency influences surgical outcome in treatment of rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:1215–1221.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sun WM, Read N, Miner PB et al. The role of transient internal anal sphincter relaxation in faecal incontinence. Int J Colorectal Dis 1990;5:31–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Broden G, Dolk A, Hölmstrom B. Recovery of the internal anal sphincter following rectopexy: a possible explanation for continence improvement. Int J Colorectal Dis 1988;3: 23–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Goes RN, Simons AJ, Beart RW Jr. Level of highest mean pressure segment in the anal canal. A quantitative assessment of anal sphincter function. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39: 289–293.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zbar AP, Aslam M, Gold DM et al. Parameters of the rectoanal inhibitory reflex in patients with idiopathic fecal incontinence and chronic constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 1998;41:200–208.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Siproudhis L, Bellissant E, Juguet F et al. Rectal adaptation to distension in patients with overt rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 1998;85:1527–1532.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Glasgow SC, Birnbaum EH, Kodner IJ et al. Preoperative anal manometry predicts continence after perineal proctectomy for rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 2006;49:1052–1058.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chun SW, Pikarsky AJ, You SY et al. Perineal rectosigmoidectomy for rectal prolapse: role of levatorplasty. Tech Coloproctol 2004;8:3–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kim M, Reibetanz J, Boenicke L et al. Quality of life after transperineal rectosigmoidectomy. Br J Surg 2010;97: 269–272.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Altomare DF, Binda G, Ganio E et al; Rectal Prolapse Study Group. Long-term outcome of Altemeier’s procedure for rectal prolapsed. Dis Colon Rectum 2009;52:698–703.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Boccasanta P, Venturi M, Barbieri S, Roviaro G. Impact of new technologies on the clinical and functional outcome of Altemeier’s procedure: a randomized, controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 2006;49:652–660.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Romano G, Bianco F, Caggiano L. Modified perineal stapled rectal resection with Contour Transtar for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Colorectal Dis 2009;11:878–881.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dench JE, Scott SM, Lunniss PJ et al. Multimedia article. External pelvic rectal suspension (the express procedure) for internal rectal prolapse, with or without concomitant rectocele repair: a video demonstration. Dis Colon Rectum 2006; 49:1922–1926.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wijffels N, Cunningham C, Dixon A et al. Laparoscopic anterior rectopexy for external rectal prolapse is safe and effective in the elderly. Does this make perineal procedures obsolete? Colorectal Dis 2010;20 February epub ahead of print.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew P. Zbar
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Colon and Rectal SurgeryUniversities of New England and New CastleAustralia

Personalised recommendations