What is the value of minimizing access trauma for patients?]

Minimizing the access trauma of surgical interventions is becoming an essential task in modern surgery in order to make the treatment more comfortable for the patient. Minimally invasive surgery has had a major impact on the improvement of surgical results over the last decade. This is why such surgery is often named as the third patient friendly revolution in surgery after the introduction of asepsis and anesthesia. Operations that caused a huge strain on the patients in the past and led to immense costs for society because of the patient's lost working time and extensive rehabilitation, have lost their fear thanks to this technique. The physical strain is lower, the cosmetic effect is considerable and the costs for society might be reduced due to the significantly shorter duration of convalescence.Despite its known advantages, which have been reported in numerous studies, minimally invasive surgery has recently gained increased interest because of the installation of new accounting systems as well as strict budgeting and restricted resources.Realistic cost-benefit analysis and objectified quality controls are needed in order to guarantee innovative and patient friendly basic approaches in medicine in the future.     

Advantages of laparoscopic colectomy in older patients

HYPOTHESIS: Few data describe the relative benefits of an expedited recovery program and laparoscopic technique in older vs younger patients undergoing colectomy. We compared short-term outcomes in age-matched cohorts of patients undergoing laparoscopic vs open segmental colectomy managed with the Controlled Rehabilitation With Early Ambulation and Diet program. DESIGN: Four age-matched cohorts of patients were compared: (1). patients 70 years or older undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (group 1), (2). those 70 or older undergoing open colectomy (group 2), (3). those younger than 60 undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (group 3), and (4). those younger than 60 undergoing open colectomy (group 4). METHODS: Data collected included age, sex, body mass index, Physiologic and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Morbidity and Mortality, American Society of Anesthesiologists' score, estimated blood loss, operative duration in minutes, pathologic findings, type of segmental colectomy, complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, and 30-day readmission rate. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-six patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and had complete data available for collection (group 1, 50 patients; group 2, 123 patients; group 3, 181 patients; and group 4, 122 patients). Demographic data, operative procedures, and pathologic findings were similar among the cohorts. The mean +/- SEM length of hospital stay was significantly shorter with laparoscopic surgery in both age cohorts (group 1, 4.2 +/- 3.0 days; group 2, 9.3 +/- 7.6 days; group 3, 3.9 +/- 5.9 days; and group 4, 6.1 +/- 3.0 days). The mean +/- SEM direct hospital costs were significantly lower only with laparoscopic colectomy in the older cohorts. Using the Physiologic and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Morbidity and Mortality, it was noted that group 2 experienced an observed rate of morbidity similar to that predicted. Conversely, groups 1, 3, and 4 had rates that were significantly lower than expected. Mean +/- SEM readmission rates were comparable in the older cohorts (group 1, 6.0%, and group 2, 6.5%) but significantly different in the younger cohorts (group 3, 9.4%, and group 4, 4.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The Controlled Rehabilitation With Early Ambulation and Diet program in combination with laparoscopic segmental colectomy can be safely performed in all age groups. The technique offers particular advantages to older patients because of reductions in length of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality rates, and direct cost of care.     

Prospective randomized trial comparing conventional laparoscopic colectomy with hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy

BACKGROUND: Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) represents a useful alternative to conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS). Its potential advantages--(a quicker, safer procedure and less need to convert to open surgery) are due to the recovery of tactile feedback. However, HALS requires the performance of a mini-laparotomy when surgery commences, and the wound is stretched and compressed throughout the procedure. In addition, it is associated with a more intense manipulation of the intraabdominal viscera. All of these factors increase the surgical trauma, it is not known whether HALS maintains the minimally invasive characteristics of conventional LS. Therefore, we set out to study the applicability, immediate clinical outcome, inflammatory response, and cost of HALS compared with conventional LS using colectomy as a model. METHODS: We performed a prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic-assisted colectomy with HAL colectomy. The aims of the study were to assess (a) perioperative features, including time, advantages, and conversion; (b) the patient's immediate clinical response, including recovery of bowel sounds, refeeding time, postoperative pain, local and general morbidity, and hospital stay; (c) the effect on the inflammatory response, using interleukin-6 (ILG) and C-reactive protein (CRP) measurements; (d) oncological issues, including intraoperative cytology and features of the specimen; and (d) the relative costs of the two procedures. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients were enrolled in the study, 27 laparoscopic and 27 HALS. The operative times were similar, but HALS was associated with a far lower conversion rate--7% vs 23%. Immediate clinical outcomes, oncological features, and costs were similar for the two procedures, but HALS was associated with a significantly greater increase in IL6 and CRP than the conventional laparoscopic procedure. CONCLUSION: This comparative study shows that HALS simplifies difficult intraoperative situations, reducing the need for conversion. Although it is a more aggressive procedure, HALS preserves the features of a minimally invasive approach, maintains all of the oncological features of conventional laparoscopic surgery, and does not increase the cost. HALS should therefore be considered as a useful adjunct when difficult situations arise during conventional laparoscopic colectomy.     

Outcome of laparoscopic colectomy for cancer in elderly patients

Background

Resection for colon cancer in the elderly is a major undertaking. However, data on the outcome and survival of elderly patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for colon cancer are limited. This study of patients older than 75 years compared outcome and survival between those who underwent laparoscopic resection and those who had open resection for colorectal cancer.

Methods

From 2000 to 2009, 434 patients ages 75 years and older who underwent elective resection for colon cancer were included in the study. Patients who had rectal cancer or had undergone emergency operations were excluded. Preoperative diagnosis was determined by colonoscopy, and computed tomography scan was performed for preoperative staging. Data on the patients’ demographics, operative details, pathology results, postoperative results, and survival were collected prospectively. The patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were compared with those who had open surgery.

Results

The study included 434 patients (210 men) with a median age of 80 years (range 75–95 years). Of these 434 patients, 189 underwent laparoscopic resection. Nine patients (4.8 %) required conversion to open operation. The patients did not differ in terms of age, gender, incidence of medical comorbidities, or stage of disease. The median operating time was longer in the laparoscopic group, but the blood loss was significantly less. Laparoscopic resection was associated with a lower mortality rate and a shorter hospital stay (p < 0.05). The open resection group had significantly more cardiac complications (p < 0.05). The overall 5-year survival rates were similar between the patients who had laparoscopic resections and those who had open surgery.

Conclusions

For patients older than 75 years, laparoscopic resection of colon is associated with less intraoperative blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, fewer cardiac complication, and a lower mortality rate than open resection. Therefore, the authors recommend laparoscopic resection of colon cancer as the treatment of choice for elderly patients.     

Systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic colectomy and multiport laparoscopic colectomy

Background

There is currently a paucity of research comparing the clinical outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) with those obtained with multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MLC). This meta-analysis aimed to examine whether SILC shows real benefits over MLC, especially in terms of feasibility, safety, and oncological adequacy.

Methods

A literature review of studies comparing SILC and MLC has been performed which looked at the following outcomes: mortality, morbidity, and oncological parameters of adequacy, as well as other potential benefits and drawbacks. Standardized mean difference for continuous variables and odds ratios for qualitative variables were calculated.

Results

Thirty studies comparing SILC and MLC were reviewed: two prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs), eight prospective studies, and 20 retrospective comparative observational studies. Overall, in a cohort of 3502 patients who underwent surgery, SILC was used in 1068 cases (30.5 %) and MLC was used in 2434 cases (69.5 %). Mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower when the SILC procedure had been used (75.06 vs. 91.45 ml, P = 0.03); bowel function recovered significantly earlier in the SILC patients (1.96 vs. 2.15 days, P = 0.03); mean postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SILC group (5.55 vs. 6.60 days, P = 0.0005); and length of skin incision was significantly shorter in SILC patients (3.98 vs. 5.28 cm, P = 0.01). However, in the latter four outcomes, evidence of heterogeneity was found. In contrast, MLC showed significantly better results when compared to SILC in terms of distal free margins (12.26 vs. 10.98 cm, P = 0.01).

Conclusions

SILC could be considered as a safe and feasible alternative to MLC in experienced hands. Further evidence for this surgical procedure should be assessed in the form of high-quality RCTs, with additional focus on its use in low rectal cancer resection.

     

Implementation and usefulness of single‐access laparoscopic segmental and total colectomy

Aim Single‐access laparoscopic surgery is a recent vogue in the field of minimally invasive colorectal surgery. While selected series have indicated feasibility, we prospectively examined its usefulness for resectional surgery in routine practice. Method All patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection over a 12‐month period were considered for a single‐access approach by a single surgical team in a university hospital. This utilized a ‘glove’ port via a 3–5 cm periumbilical or stomal site incision, with standard rigid laparoscopic instruments then being used. Results Of 76 planned laparoscopic colorectal resections, 35 (47%) were performed by this single‐incision laparoscopic modality without disruption of theatre list efficiency or surgical training obligations. The mean (range) age and body mass index of these 25 consecutive right‐sided resections, eight total colectomies (seven urgent operations) and two anterior resections was 58 (22–82) years and 23.9 (18.6–36.2) kg/m², respectively. The modal postoperative day of discharge was 4. For right‐sided resections, the mean (range) postoperative stay in those undergoing surgery for benign disease was 4.0 days, while for those undergoing operation for neoplasia (n = 18, mean age 71 years) it was 5.8 days and the average lymph node harvest was 13. Use of the glove port reduced trocar cost by 58% (€60/£53) by allowing the use of trocar sleeves alone without obturators. Conclusion Single‐incision laparoscopic surgery is an effective option for abdominal surgery and seems especially suited for laparoscopic‐assisted right‐sided colonic resections. The glove port technique facilitates procedural frequency and familiarity and proves economically favourable.     

Intraoperative endoscopy in laparoscopic colectomy

Background: The localization of focal colonic pathologies is problematical in laparoscopic surgery because it is difficult to palpate the colon. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of intraoperative lower endoscopy in laparoscopic segmental colectomy. Methods: We did a retrospective review of the charts of patients who had undergone laparoscopic segmental colectomy. Patients in whom intraoperative lower endoscopy had been used were compared to a group of 250 patients who had colectomy by laparotomy. The patients were matched by type of surgery and operating surgeon. Results: Between 1991 and 2000, 233 patients underwent laparoscopic segmental colectomy at our clinic. Lower endoscopy was employed in 57 of them (24%), as compared to 42 patients (17%) in the laparotomy matched group ( p = 0.042). The diseased segment was successfully identified in all of the patients in whom the main indication for endoscopy was localization (65% of cases). Endoscopy was judged to have changed the surgical management in 66% of the 57 cases in whom it was employed, and especially in 88% of the 37 patients for whom the main indication had been localization. There were no endoscopy-related complications. Conclusion: Intraoperative lower endoscopy is a useful and safe tool for the localization of pathologies and the assessment of the intracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic segmental colectomy.     

Laparoscopic-assisted vs open colectomy for severe acute colitis in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) can be complicated by severe acute colitis. Emergency colectomy is mandatory if patients do not respond to intensive medical therapy. A minimally invasive approach such as laparoscopic-assisted colectomy might be beneficial in these patients. Therefore, we set out to assess the feasibility and the safety of emergency laparoscopic-assisted colectomy in IBD patients with severe acute colitis. METHODS: A total of 42 consecutive patients underwent an emergency colectomy with end-ileostomy. Ten patients had laparoscopic-assisted colectomy, and 32 had open colectomy. Pre- and perioperative parameters, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable for patient characteristics. There were no conversions in the laparoscopic group. The operation time was longer in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (271 vs 150 min; p < 0.001), but the hospital stay was shorter (14.6 vs 18.0 days; p = 0.05). Complications were similar for the two groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic-assisted colectomy in IBD patients with severe acute colitis is feasible and as safe as open colectomy.     

Single-port laparoscopic colectomy is safe and feasible in patients with previous abdominal surgery

Background

The aim of this study was to assess the impact of previous abdominal surgery (PAS) on single-port laparoscopic colectomy (SPLC).

Methods

We studied 429 consecutive patients who underwent SPLC in our department from May 2009 to December 2013. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those with PAS (PAS group) and those with NPAS (NPAS group). Operative parameters and outcomes were analyzed between the 2 groups retrospectively.

Results

SPLC was performed in 152 PAS patients and 277 NPAS patients. Eight patients in the PAS group and 6 patients in the NPAS group were converted to multiport laparoscopic colectomy (5.3% vs 2.2%, respectively; P = .077). Three patients in the PAS group and 2 patients in the NPAS group had inadvertent enterotomy (2.0% vs .7%, respectively; P = .352). No patients were converted to open surgery. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of blood loss, operative time, and postoperative outcomes.

Conclusion

Our experience has demonstrated the safety and feasibility of SPLC in patients with PAS.     

Laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients: a comparison of laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic techniques

Background

Recent American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP)-based evidence indicates that laparoscopic (LAP) colectomy results in improved outcomes compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy in the general population. Previous comparative studies demonstrated that the HAL technique offers distinct advantages for obese patients. The aim of this study was to perform comparative analyses of HAL and LAP colectomy and low anterior resection (LAR) in obese patients.

Methods

The ACS-NSQIP public use file and targeted colectomy dataset, 2012-2014, were utilized for patients undergoing colectomy and LAR. Only obese patients (BMI?>?30) and laparoscopic or hand-assisted operations were included. Patient, operation, and outcome variables were compared in two separate cohorts: colectomy and LAR. Bivariate analysis compared the approaches, followed by multivariable regression.

Results

Of 9610 obese patients included, HAL and LAP colectomy were performed in 3126 and 3793 patients and LAR in 1431 and 1260 patients, respectively. In comparison to LAP colectomy, HAL colectomy patients had increased comorbidities including class 2 and 3 obesity. HAL colectomy was associated with higher overall morbidity (20 vs. 16%, p?<?0.001), infectious complications (10.2 vs. 7.7%, p?<?0.001), anastomotic leaks (3.0 vs. 2.2%, p?=?0.03), and ileus (11 vs. 8%, p?<?0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated that overall morbidity (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11–1.44), infectious complications (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14–1.59), and ileus (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.12–1.57) were each increased in the HAL colectomy cohort but not different for HAL and LAP LAR.

Conclusions

In comparison to LAP colectomy, the HAL technique is used more often in obese patients with an increased operative risk profile. While inherent bias and unmeasured variables limit the analysis, the available data indicate that the HAL technique is associated with increased perioperative morbidity. Alternatively, HAL and LAP LAR are performed in obese patients with a similar risk profile and result in similar postoperative outcomes.

     

老年结直肠癌患者腹腔镜手术与开放手术的临床对比研究

目的:通过对老年结直肠癌患者腹腔镜手术与开放手术各项临床指标的对比研究,探讨老年结直肠癌患者行腹腔镜手术的安全性和可行性。方法:回顾分析2006年1月至2009年12月为117例≥60岁结直肠癌患者行肿瘤根治术的临床资料,其中腹腔镜辅助结直肠癌根治术(A组)55例,传统开腹结直肠癌根治术(B组)62例。对比分析两组的一般情况(ASA评分)、手术病理分级(Dukes分期)、手术时间、手术出血量、术前及术后心肺功能、术中气道压力、酸碱平衡、术后胃肠道功能恢复时间、术后并发症、标本淋巴结阳性率等围手术期情况。结果:两组患者术前ASA评分、合并症、病理分级及手术时间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。术中患者心功能指标心脏指数、射血分数、肺功能指标动脉血PaCO2、pH值腹腔镜组均有所增高(P0.05),但术后1d再测指标差异无统计学意义。气道压力腹腔镜组明显增高,可通过麻醉改变呼吸指数调整。腹腔镜组胃肠恢复排气时间、术后住院时间显著短于开腹组(P0.05);术中出血、术后相应并发症腹腔镜组明显少于开腹组(P0.05);死亡率、术后淋巴结获取数、阳性率及直肠癌环周切缘阳性率两组差异无统计学意义。结论:为老年结直肠癌患者行腹腔镜辅助根治术具有良好的安全性及可行性,具有出血少、康复快、并发症少、住院时间短等优势。     

老年人乙状结肠癌腹腔镜手术对细胞免疫功能的影响

Objective To investigate the effect of laparoscopic colectomy on T Lymphocytic cell subpopulation, NK cell, lnterleukin-2 （IL-2） and interleukin-6（IL-6） in elderly patients with colon cancer. Methods Thirty elderly patients with colon cancer undergoing eolectomy were randomly divided into laparoscopic colectomy group （groupⅠ n = 15）and open colectomy group（groupⅡ n = 15）. Blood samples were taken before operation and 4 h,8 h,24 h,48 h,168 h after the operation for the determination of T Lymphocytic cell subpopulation （CD3, CD4,CD8,CD4/CD8）, NK cell, Interleukin-2 （IL-2）and Interleukin-6（IL-6）. Results Before operation, there was no significant difference of CD3,CD4,CD8 ,CD4/CD8, NK cell, IL-2 and IL-6 between the two groups. The level of CD3, CD4 and Nk cells were all decreased at postoperative 4 h ,8 h,24 h,48 h in group Ⅰ as compared with baseline value, and were lower than those of basehne value in group Ⅱ. Compared with groupⅠ, the level of CD3 in group Ⅱ was increased at postoperative 8 h,24 h ,48 h, and the level of CD4 was also increased at postoperative 4 h,24 h ,48 h , meanwhile the concentration of NK cell was remarkably high. Compared with baseline value , IL-2 was decreased at postoperative 4 h ,8 h,24 h,48 h in group Ⅰ ,while IL-6 was increased significantly after operation, the tendency was the same in group Ⅱ. IL-2 in group Ⅰwas lower than that of group Ⅱ at postoperative 4 h ,8 h,24 h,48 h, while IL-6 in group Ⅰ was remarkably higher than that of group Ⅱ at postoperative 4 h ,8 h,24 h,48 h. Conclusion The depression of immunological function in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy is less than that of open surgery. This might be benificial to the patients with colectomy.     

常规腹腔镜与单孔腹腔镜在结肠切除术中应用价值比较的Meta分析

目的:通过对比常规腹腔镜与单孔腹腔镜结肠切除术的有效性及安全性,探讨单孔腹腔镜结肠切除术的潜在优势及应用价值。方法:检索PubMed、Cochrane Library数据库公开发表的常规腹腔镜与单孔腹腔镜结肠切除术对比的文献。通过采用RevMan 5.0统计软件,合并及对比两组手术时间、术中出血量、中转开腹/增加穿刺孔率、术后并发症发生率、住院时间等,选择计算相对危险度(RR,95%的可信区间)及均数差(MD,95%的可信区间)作为效应尺度指标,评估两种术式的有效性及安全性。结果:18项研究符合纳入标准,其中常规腹腔镜结肠手术678例,单孔腹腔镜结肠手术542例,共1 220例。本项Meta分析结果表明单孔腹腔镜结肠切除术中出血少、住院时间短(合并MD分别为-20.25,95%CI:-30.25～-1.24,P=0.04;-0.38,95%CI:-0.63～0.13,P=0.002),而手术时间、中转开腹或增加穿刺孔率、术后并发症发生率两种术式差异无统计学意义(合并MD为3.90,95%CI:-2.45～10.24,P=0.23;合并RR分别为1.67,95%CI:0.96～2.91,P=0.07;0.89,95%CI:0.69-1.14,P=0.36)。结论:对于具有丰富腹腔镜手术经验的术者而言,单孔腹腔镜结肠手术是安全、可行、有效的,与常规腹腔镜手术具有相似的手术疗效;手术创伤、术后康复、微创美容、术后疼痛方面单孔腹腔镜结肠切除术更具优势;但尚需开展大样本的随机对照试验及高质量的对比研究以进一步论证。     

Totally laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy with transanal specimen extraction

Background  

Conventional techniques for laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) require abdominal minilaparotomy for extraction of the specimen. Abdominal wound complications often increase the invasiveness of LAC. To decrease the incidence of wound complications, natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) has been reported. However, only a few devices that allow smooth extraction and reduced intracorporeal contamination have been reported previously. We performed totally laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy using transanal specimen extraction (TASE) and the Alexis^? wound retractor (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA, USA). We document this simple and safe technique and its short-term results.     

Subclinical hepatic dysfunction in laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic colectomy

Laparoscopic surgery causes a reduction in hepatic blood flowdue to a number of factors, including raised intra-abdominalpressure, the neurohumoral response to surgical stress and theeffect of patient position. The clinical significance of thephenomenon is not fully understood. Plasma concentrations ofalcohol dehydrogenase (AD) and glutathione S-transferase (GST),which are concentrated in the centrilobular acinus of the liver,sensitively reflect hepatic hypoperfusion, and can be used tomonitor reductions in hepatic blood flow. We compared perioperativeAD, GST, aspartate aminotransferase (AST, normal range 14–32IU litre^–1) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT, normalrange 8–41 U litre^–1) concentrations inpatients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy or laparoscopiccolectomy to study how patient position and surgical manipulationof the liver affect hepatocellular integrity during laparoscopy.There were significant postoperative increases in AD and GSTin the cholecystectomy group [mean (SD) peak concentration 10.8(4.7) U litre^–1 and 113 (55) µg litre^–1respectively]. Although the duration of pneumoperitoneum waslonger in the colectomy group, there were no comparable perioperativeincreases in AD and GST in this group [peak concentration 4.0(4.0) U litre^–1 and 33 (35) µg litre^–1respectively]. AST and ALT on the first postoperative day weresignificantly higher in the laparoscopic cholecystectomy group(41 and 34 U litre^–1 respectively) than in thelaparoscopic colectomy group (24 and 18 U litre^–1;P<0.05 for each). These results indicate that patient positionand the effects of surgical manipulation of the liver affectperioperative hepatic perfusion significantly. Br J Anaesth 2001; 87: 774–6     

Pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis, treated with laparoscopic colectomy

The authors report a case of pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis which, after failure of medical treatment, was treated by laparoscopic partial colectomy. Surgical treatment is a last resort and the laparoscopically-assisted approach seems to be a good indication in colectomy for pneumatosis cystoides intestinalis.     

Comparison of laparoscopic subtotal colectomy with posterior vaginal suspension and laparoscopic subtotal colectomy with transvaginal repair for patients with slow-transit constipation complicated with rectocele: a non-randomized comparative study in a single center

Background

Slow-transit constipation complicated with rectocele is a mixed constipation difficult to treat by surgery. Different hospitals and surgeons may employ different surgical procedures. The present study aims to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic subtotal colectomy (LSC) with posterior vaginal suspension and LSC with transvaginal repair for patients having refractory slow-transit constipation complicated with rectocele.

Methods

This paper is a retrospective study of 64 patients having refractory slow-transit constipation complicated with rectocele. Admitted from January 2002 to December 2012, the 64 patients were non-randomly divided into two groups: patients who underwent LSC with posterior vaginal suspension (Group A, 36 patients) and patients who underwent LSC with transvaginal repair (Group B, 28 patients).

Results

There was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) in preoperative general characteristics and Wexner constipation score between Group A and Group B. There was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) in operative time and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups. One month after the surgery, there was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) in early postoperative complications, constipation recurrence rate, degree of improvement in constipation symptoms, and Wexner constipation score between the two groups. But 1-year follow-up results show that there was statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) in constipation recurrence rate, gastrointestinal quality of life index, the degree of improvement in constipation symptoms, and Wexner constipation score between the two groups.

Conclusion

Compared with the LSC with transvaginal repair, the LSC with posterior vaginal suspension demonstrated better efficacy in treating refractory slow-transit constipation complicated with rectocele.