Resection rectopexy—laparoscopic neuromapping reveals neurogenic pathways to the lower segment of the rectum: preliminary results

Purpose

Nerve sparing in functional pelvic floor surgery is strongly recommended as intraoperative damage to the autonomic nerves may predispose to persistent or worsened anorectal and urogenital function. The aim of this study was to investigate the intraoperative neural topography above the pelvic floor in patients undergoing laparoscopic resection rectopexy in combination with electrophysiologic neuromapping.

Methods

Ten consecutive female patients underwent laparoscopic resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Intraoperative identification of pelvic autonomic nerves was carried out with a novel intraoperative neuromonitoring system based on electric stimulation under simultaneous electromyography of the internal anal sphincter and manometry of the bladder. Neuromonitoring results were compared to patients' preoperative anorectal and urogenital function and their functional results at the 3-month follow-up.

Results

Laparoscopy in combination with electrophysiologic neuromapping revealed neurogenic pathways to the lower segment of the rectum during surgical mobilization. In all procedures, intraoperative neuromonitoring finally confirmed functional nerve integrity to the internal anal sphincter and the bladder. Patients with preoperatively diagnosed fecal incontinence were continent at the 3-month follow-up. The Wexner score improved in median from preoperative 4 (range 1–18) to 1 (range 0–3) at follow-up (p?=?0.012). Cleveland Clinical Constipation Score improved in median from 10 (range 5–17) to 3 (range 1–7; p?=?0.005). In none of the investigated patients a new onset of urinary dysfunction did occur. No change in sexual function was observed.

Conclusions

Laparoscopy in combination with electrophysiologic neuromapping during nerve-sparing resection rectopexy identified and preserved neurogenic pathways heading to the lower segment of the rectum above the level of the pelvic floor.     

The effect of abdominal ventral rectopexy on faecal incontinence and constipation in patients with internal intra‐anal rectal intussusception

Aim Optimal treatment of anal incontinence in a patients with a normal anal sphincter is controversial, as is the role of intra‐anal rectal intussusception in anal incontinence. We evaluated the results of abdominal ventral rectopexy on anal continence in such patients. Method Forty consecutive patients with incontinence and intra‐anal rectal intussusception without a sphincter defect were treated by abdominal ventral mesh rectopexy without sigmoidectomy. The Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS), patient satisfaction and constipation before and after surgery and recurrence were recorded. Results The mean CCI scores were 13.2 (=/?4.25) preoperatively and 3 (±3.44) postoperatively (P<0.0001). Patient assessment was reported as ‘cured’ in 26 (65%), ‘improved’ in 13 (32.5%) and ‘unchanged’ in one (2.5%) patient. Constipation was induced in two (5%) patients and was cured in 13 of 20 (65%) patients who were constipated before surgery. One case of recurrent prolapse occurred after a mean follow‐up of 38 months. Conclusion Intra‐anal rectal intussusception may be associated with anal incontinence. For these patients, abdominal ventral mesh rectopexy appears to be an adequate treatment.     

Resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse

Background: Resection rectopexy through open laparotomy is an established procedure for the treatment of rectal prolapse. Methods: Resection rectopexy was successfully performed in 10 multiparous women by the laparoscopic approach (LAP), and the results were compared to those of eight women with laparotomy resection rectopexy (OPEN). Preoperative and postoperative assessment included anorectal manometry, defecography, and measurement of large-bowel transit. Results: The duration of the operation was longer in the LAP than in the OPEN group (p < 0.01). Morbidity was lower (p < 0.01) and hospital stay was shorter (p < 0.001) after the LAP than in the OPEN group. Prolapse was cured in all cases. Postoperatively, anal resting and squeeze pressures and rectal compliance increased significantly in both groups of patients (p= 0.007, p= 0.003, and p < 0.001, respectively). In all patients, the operation resulted in acceleration of large-bowel transit (p < 0.001) and in more obtuse anorectal angles at rest (p= 0.007). In addition, sampling events were observed more commonly (p= 0.008) postoperatively. Preoperatively, incontinence was present in 13 patients (seven LAP and six OPEN) and persisted in four of them after rectopexy (two LAP and two OPEN). Conclusions: Resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse can be performed safely via the laparoscopic route. Recovery is uneventful and of shorter duration after the laparoscopic than after the open approach. Similarly satisfactory functional results are obtained with both procedures. Received: 16 February 1998/Accepted: 2 September 1998     

Early outcomes of laparoscopic procedures performed on military personnel with total rectal prolapse and follow-up

Total rectal prolapse is a disorder frequently associated with constipation and anal incontinence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the complications, pain management, hospital stay, constipation, and anal functions of the patients undergoing 2 types of laparoscopic surgical approaches. In this study, 33 patients underwent either laparoscopic rectopexy or hand-assisted laparoscopic resection rectopexy. Preoperative colonic transit time, defecation, postoperative pain scoring, pre-postoperative evaluation of the anal function, and the changes in constipation and relating symptoms were assessed. Postoperative evaluation had been performed at the sixth week and the twelfth month. Median operation time was 137 minutes for rectopexy and 230 minutes for resection rectopexy group. Median postoperative hospital stay was 3 days for patients with rectopexy and 7 days for patients with resection rectopexy. Patients needed painkillers in short postoperative period for pain management in both groups. Continence was improved in 11 of 13 patients (84.6%) in a year after laparoscopic surgery. In 15 patients (45.5%), preoperative constipation either remained in the same or became worse in 7 (21.1%) in a year after surgery. No patient developed recurrence in the median follow-up period, which was about 15 months. Laparoscopic rectopexy and resection rectopexy in the young aged patients working the Army are carried out with less morbidity rate. We eliminated the total prolapse and cure incontinence in almost all patients. In addition to constipation was reduced by laparoscopic surgical approaches in a short time hospitalization with short time painkiller need.     

Laparotomic vs. laparoscopic rectopexy in complete rectal prolapse

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the functional and clinical results of laparotomic and laparoscopic rectopexy in 2 homogeneous groups of patients with complete rectal prolapse and fecal incontinence. METHODS: Between January 1989 and December 1997, twenty-three patients underwent abdominal rectopexy. Thirteen patients (group A, 12 females and 1 male, mean age 57.3, range 22-76 years), and 10 patients (group B, 10 females, mean age 52.3, range 26-70 years) were submitted respectively to either Wells laparotomic or laparoscopic rectopexy by the same surgical team using the same surgical technique and materials. Before the operation a detailed clinical history was collected, and the patients were studied by inspection and digital examination of the anorectum, proctosigmoidoscopy, pancolonic transit time, dynamic defecography, anorectal manometry and anal electromyography. After the operation all patients underwent perineal physiotherapy, external electric stimulation, and perineal biofeedback. Mean follow-up was 37.1 (range 6-90) months in group A and 25.7 (range 6-49) months in group B. Values were compared by chi(2), Mann-Whitney U, and Wilcoxon tests as appropriate. Differences were considered significant at p < 0.05. RESULTS: In both groups dyschezia and fecal incontinence improved significantly (p < 0.05) after the operation. The basal pressure of the anal sphincter, squeezing pressure and rectoanal reflex improved without significance, and anal-perineal pain was not significantly reduced. In group B the postoperative hospital stay was lower than in group A, with a reduction in costs. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic Wells rectopexy has the same clinical and functional results as laparotomic rectopexy, but with a shorter postoperative hospital stay and lower costs. Copyright Copyright 1999 S.Karger AG, Basel     

Laparoscopic rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse: a single-institution retrospective study evaluating surgical outcome

Background The laparoscopic approach promises to become the gold standard for the transabdominal management of full-thickness rectal prolapse. The aim of this study was to review our experience and to highlight the functional results achieved with this new technique.Methods Forty-eight patients with full-thickness external prolapse underwent laparoscopic repair between February 1997 and February 2003. All patients underwent preoperative evaluation of their rectal function. Patients with isolated rectal ulcer without prolapse or with internal prolapse and patients deemed by the anesthesiologist to be unfit for general anesthesia were excluded from the study. The laparoscopic technique was either a mesh rectopexy without resection (n = 35) or a suture rectopexy with sigmoid resection (n = 13). Patients with intractable constipation preceding the development of the rectal prolapse were advised to have a resection–rectopexy. In the postoperative follow-up, attention was paid to mortality, morbidity, recurrent prolapse, incontinence, and constipation. Follow-up was done by clinical review and postal questionnaire.Results There were no deaths and no septic or anastomotic complications. The postoperative morbidity rate was 5%. Oral intake was started on postoperative day 1. Discharge from the hospital was on postoperative day 4 in patients without sigmoid resection and on postoperative day 7 in patients with sigmoid resection. Two patients (4%) developed recurrent total prolapse during a median follow-up period of 36 ± 15 months (range, 7–77). The functional results were good or excellent in 72% of the cases, without digitations or dyschesia. Continence was improved in 31% of the patients and remains unchanged in 64% of them. In 11 patients (23%), constipation was worsened by the procedure.Conclusion Laparoscopic rectopexy with or without resection is both safe and effective. Advantages include low-morbidity, improved cosmesis, the rapid return of intestinal function, early discharge from hospital, and a low recurrence rate. The fecal continence score is improved; however, constipation is frequently worsened.This work is dedicated to the memory of Gerard Trebuchet, a highly influential French surgeon remembered for his implementation of several techniques for laparoscopic colon resection. Gerard Trebuchet died in Rennes, Frence, on 1 September 2003, at the age of 59 years.     

Role of transperineal Doppler and ultrasound in evaluating anal sphincter injury after stapled haemorrhoidopexy

The stapler treatment first described by Longo is considered by some authors to be a good technical solution for mucohaemorrhoidectomy. The aim of the present prospective study was to assess the function and morphology of the internal and external anal sphincters preoperatively and one month after surgery by means of a clinical examination, anorectal manometry and transperineal ultrasound. Ten patients (6 M, 4 F) underwent rectal mucosal prolapsectomy according to Longo. Anoscopy, anorectal manometry and transperineal ultrasound were performed in all patients preoperatively and again one month after surgery. The thickness and integrity of the internal and external anal sphincters were ascertained and colour Doppler was performed to assess the presence, quantity and size of any haemorrhoid swellings. All anatomical specimens underwent histological examination in search of smooth muscle fibres. Anorectal manometry revealed no postoperative sphincter tone defects. Transperineal ultrasound detected no postoperative sphincter lesions and the presence of venous swellings (always present at preoperative colour Doppler) never persisted at postoperative follow-up. The mean follow-up was 52.7 days (range: 31-151). Transperineal ultrasound proved useful in demonstrating the lifting of the mucohaemorrhoid prolapse within the ampulla of the rectum one month after surgery. The Longo procedure, in our albeit limited experience, caused no sphincter lesions.     

Resection rectopexy for external rectal prolapse reduces constipation and anal incontinence.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The main aim was to examine constipation and anal incontinence in patients before and after resection for external rectal prolapse. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty patients had ligament preserving suture rectopexy and sigmoid resection (resection rectopexy) for external rectal prolapse by laparoscopic (n = 15) or open (n = 5) technique during 2001-2005. They were prospectively evaluated for constipation and anal incontinence using validated incontinence and KESS-constipation scores. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Constipation score was significantly reduced from mean 7.7 (5.4-9.9) to 4.5 (2.5-6.4) after median 4 months (1-19) and to 4.3 (2.2-6.3) after median 17 months (4-51). Six and four patients were constipated preoperatively and 17 months postoperatively, respectively. The four symptoms feeling incomplete evacuation of stool, minutes in lavatory per attempt, use of enemas/digitation and painful evacuation effort were significantly reduced, whilst stool consistency increased. Fourteen patients (70%) had anal incontinence. Corresponding and significant reduction in their scores were from mean 12.5 (9.4-15.5) to 5.1 (2.1-8.1) and to 3.6 (1.3-5.9). Incontinence was improved in 13 and unaltered in one patient(s). Two patients with worse outcome had increased stool consistency and constipation scores. Resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse reduced anal incontinence and constipation.     

Laparoscopic repair of rectal prolapse

Background: There have been few large series that have focused on the feasibility of the laparoscopic approach for rectal prolapse. This single-institution study prospectively examines the surgical outcome and changes in symptoms and bowel function following the laparoscopic repair of rectal prolapse. Methods: In a selected group of 34 patients (total prolapse, 28; intussusception, six), 17 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted resection rectopexy and 17 patients received a laparoscopic sutured rectopexy. Preoperative and postoperative evaluation at 3, 6, and 12 months included assessment of the severity of anal incontinence, constipation, changes in constipation-related symptoms, and colonic transit time. Results: Median operation time was 255 min (range, 180–360) in the resection rectopexy group and 150 min (range, 90–295) in the rectopexy alone group. Median postoperative hospital stay was 5 days (range, 3–15) and median time off work was 14 days (range, 12–21) in both groups. There were no deaths. Postoperative morbidity was 24%. Incontinence improved significantly regardless of which method was used. The main determinant of constipation was excessive straining at defecation. Constipation was cured in 70% of the patients in the rectopexy group and 64% in the resection rectopexy group. Symptoms of difficult evacuation improved, but the changes were significant only after resection rectopexy. Two patients (7%) developed recurrent total prolapse during a median follow-up of 2 years (range 12–60 months). Conclusions: Laparoscopic-sutured rectopexy and laparoscopic-assisted resection rectopexy are feasible and carry an acceptable morbidity rate. They eliminate prolapse and cure incontinence in the great majority of patients. Constipation and symptoms of difficult evacuation are alleviated. Received: 30 April 1999/Accepted: 8 July 1999/Online publication: 22 May 2000     

Functional results two years after laparoscopic rectopexy

BACKGROUND: Rectopexy is one of the accepted treatment options for full-thickness rectal prolapse, but the details of the technique remain controversial. This unit has adopted a laparoscopic approach as an alternative to open surgery, and has used three techniques: mesh, suture, and resection. This retrospective study compares the long-term outcome.METHODS: From 1993 to 1995, 14 patients underwent a laparoscopic posterior mesh rectopexy. From 1996 to 1999, 34 patients underwent laparoscopic suture rectopexy with (n = 18) or without sigmoid resection (n = 16). RESULTS: There was no postoperative mortality, and morbidity was similar in the three groups, ranging from 11 to 19%. The mean follow-up was 47, 24, and 20 months for mesh, suture, and resection rectopexy, respectively. During follow-up, 1 patient in each group developed mucosal prolapse. There was no difference between the three groups for incontinence rate, which improved in more than 75% of patients who had impaired continence preoperatively. Postoperative constipation was observed in 2 patients (11%) after resection rectopexy, in 10 (62%) after suture rectopexy (P < 0.01 versus resection), and in 9 (64%) after mesh rectopexy (P < 0.01 versus resection). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the addition of sigmoid resection to laparoscopic rectopexy is safe and could contribute to reduce the risk of severe constipation after operation. Laparoscopic mesh rectopexy confers no advantage over the sutured technique, which we now use as our fixation method of choice.