Role of defecography in predicting clinical outcome of rectocele repair

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of defecography in predicting clinical outcome of rectocele repair. METHODS: Between January 1988 and July 1994, 74 consecutive patients (median age, 54 (range, 35–81) years) with a rectocele and symptoms of obstructed defecation were studied prospectively. After preoperative evaluation by a standardized questionnaire, physical examination, and defecography, a combined transvaginal/transanal rectocele repair was performed. At follow-up, all patients had defecography. Long-term results were qualified by an independent observer after a median follow-up of 58 (range, 14–89) months as excellent, good, or poor. RESULTS: Rectocele repair was considered excellent in 37 patients and good in 13 patients. Defecography six months after surgery did not show persistent or recurrent rectocele in any of the patients. Size of the rectocele, barium-trapping in the rectocele, internal intussusception, rectal evacuation, and perineal descent did not appear to influence clinical outcome. Radiologic evidence of anismus did not correlate with longterm results of rectocele repair. CONCLUSIONS: Combined transanal/transvaginal repair of rectocele is an efficient therapy in patients with obstructed defecation. Various defecographic parameters (size of rectocele, internal intussusception, rectal evacuation, perineal descent, radiologic signs of anismus) do not appear to influence clinical outcome of surgery. The main value of defecography is the objective demonstration of rectocele and any associated abnormalities such as an enterocele preoperatively and again in objective assessment of the postoperative results.     

Analysis of patients with poor outcome of rectocele repair

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to analyze the prognostic value of clinical data and physiologic tests in patients undergoing rectocele repair for obstructed defecation. METHODS: Between 1988 and 1996, 89 consecutive female patients with obstructed defecation caused by a rectocele were enrolled in the study. Median age at time of presentation was 55 (range, 35–81) years. All patients underwent a combined transvaginal and transanal rectocele repair. End evaluation to assess long-term results was performed by an independent observer after a median duration of follow up of 52 (range, 12–92) months. The presence of the following five symptoms was evaluated: prolonged and unsuccessful straining at stool, feelings of incomplete evacuation, manual assistance during defecation, false urge to defecate, and a stool frequency of less than three times per week. When none or just one of these symptoms was present, outcome of rectocele repair was considered successful. The outcome was considered as a failure when two or more of these symptoms were recorded. Furthermore, all patients were asked to score the outcome of their operations as excellent, good, moderate, or poor. Clinical data and the results of physiologic tests obtained in patients with a poor outcome of surgery were compared with those obtained in patients with a successful outcome. RESULTS: Objective outcome of rectocele repair, based on the presence of symptoms, was found to be successful in 63 (71 percent) patients. Sixty-one patients considered outcome of surgery excellent or good (69 percent). Graded subjective outcomes between the two groups showed significantly better grades in cases of success. Duration of symptoms, number of symptoms, age, parity, and previous hysterectomy had no influence on the final outcome of surgery. Defecographic parameters, such as size of the rectocele, barium trapping in the rectocele, poor rectal evacuation, or intussusception, had no prognostic value. Signs of anismus based on defecography, electromyography, and balloon-expulsion studies did not influence outcome of surgery. The presence of symptoms such as defecation frequency, manual assistance, severe straining, false urge to defecate, or feelings of incomplete evacuation had no impact on the outcome. However, in patients without a daily urge to defecate or with a stool frequency of less than once per week, results of rectocele repair were significantly worse than in patients with a daily urge to defecate or a defecation frequency of more than once per week or both. In 14 of 26 patients with a poor outcome, colonic transit studies were performed. A delayed passage was observed throughout the entire colon in seven patients, in the left part of the colon and the rectosigmoid colon in four patients, and in the rectosigmoid colon in one patient. In two patients colonic transit was normal. CONCLUSIONS: Combined transvaginal and transanal rectocele repair is beneficial for the majority of patients with obstructed defecation. In patients without a daily urge to defecate or a stool frequency of less than once per week, indicating colonic malfunctioning, the outcome of rectocele repair seems to be poor.     

Long-Term Results of Transanal Repair of Rectocele Using Linear Stapler

PURPOSE: This study was designed to determine the long-term outcomes of transanal rectocele repair using a linear stapler.METHODS: Between 1989 and 1999, 21 patients with symptomatic rectocele were enrolled for this study. Median age at time of presentation was 52 (range, 21–75) years. All patients underwent a transanal repair using a linear stapler. End evaluation to assess long-term results was performed after a median duration of follow-up of 58 (range, 12–118) months. Patients were asked about current problems with constipation, use of laxatives, incontinence, vaginal digitalization, presence of vaginal bulge, pain, bleeding, and sexual dysfunction.RESULTS: The postoperative course was uneventful in all cases. Sixteen (76 percent) patients had symptomatic relief. The operation reduced symptoms of obstructed defecation (21 vs. 5, preoperative vs. postoperative; P < 0.001) and the need of vaginal digitalization (21 vs. 6; P < 0.001). Only three patients (14 percent) showed no sign of improvement. Two patients (9 percent) had temporary improvement for three years before recurrence.CONCLUSIONS: Transanal repair of rectocele using a linear stapler is an easy, safe, and useful procedure for the correction of symptomatic rectocele. Successful long-term outcome can be achieved with this procedure.Reprints are not available.     

Transanal repair of rectocele and full rectal mucosectomy with one circular stapler: a novel surgical technique

Abstract We present a new surgical stapling technique for treatment of rectocele when associated with internal mucosal prolapse or haemorrhoids using only one circular mechanical stapler. Eight female patients, mean age 53 years (range, 42–70), complaining of obstructed defecation with vaginal digitation because of rectocele associated with internal mucosal prolapse underwent transanal repair of rectocele and rectal mucosectomy using one circular stapler between April and July 2004. A running horizontal mattress suture was placed through the base of the rectocele including mucosa, submucosa and the muscle layer of the whole anterior anorectal junction wall. The prolapsed mucosa and the muscular layer were then excised with an electrical scapel. Acontinuous pursestring rectal mucosa suture was placed 0.5 cm before the previous anterior mucosa and muscle layers resected wound, including the anorectal junction wall which was kept separate from the posterior vaginal wall by a Babcock forceps. Posteriorly, the pursestring suture included only mucosal and submucosal layers. The stapled suture was positioned between normal anterior rectal wall and the anal canal, 0.5 cm above the pectinate line. The stapler was then closed, fired and withdrawn. One patient complained of a perianal hematoma on the seventh postoperative day, requiring surgical excision. Postoperative defecography showed correction of the rectocele and outlet obstruction disappeared in all patients. This novel combined manual-stapled technique for rectocele and rectal internal mucosal prolapse seems to be a safe procedure and the preliminary results are encouraging. Further investigations have to be performed to assess long-term outcome in a larger number of patients.     

Functional and Anatomic Outcome After Transvaginal Rectocele Repair Using Collagen Mesh: A Prospective Study

PURPOSE This study was designed to evaluate rectocele repair using collagen mesh.METHODS 32 female patients underwent surgical repair using collagen mesh. Outcome was assessed in 29 patients and preoperative assessment included standardized questionnaire, clinical examination, and defecography. At the six-month follow-up, patients answered a standardized questionnaire and underwent clinical examination. At the 12-month follow-up, patients answered a standardized questionnaire, underwent clinical examination, and defecography.RESULTS Preoperatively, 26 patients had a Stage II and 3 patients had a Stage III rectocele. At the 6-month follow-up, five patients had rectocele ≥ Stage II (P < 0.001) and at the 12-month follow-up, seven patients had rectocele ≥ Stage II (P < 0.001) at clinical examination. At the preoperative defecography, all patients presented a rectocele. At the 12-month defecography, 14 patients had no rectocele (P < 0.001) and 15 had a rectocele. At the six-month follow-up, there was a significant decrease in rectal emptying difficulties, need of digital support of the posterior vaginal wall at defecation, and defecation frequency. At the 12-month follow-up, symptom improvement remained, but was less pronounced.CONCLUSIONS Rectocele repair using collagen mesh improved anatomic support, but there is a substantial risk for recurrence with unsatisfactory anatomic and functional outcome one year after surgery. Rectocele repair using mesh was not associated with an increased risk of dyspareunia. Rectocele repair using biomaterial mesh reinforcement needs further evaluation before adopted into clinical practice.Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, New Orleans, Louisiana, June 21 to 26, 2003.     

Transvaginal anterior levatorplasty with posterior colporrhaphy for symptomatic rectocele

Abstract. Background: We evaluated functional and morphological outcomes of transvaginal anterior levatorplasty with posterior colporrhaphy for symptomatic rectocele. Methods: Ten women (median 68 years) underwent transvaginal anterior levatorplasty with posterior colporrhaphy for symptomatic rectocele. Symptoms and continence were monitored before and after surgery. Manovolumetric study and defecography were performed in 9 of 10 patients before and 3–6 months after surgery. Twenty-one females without anorectal diseases were used as controls in manovolumetric study. The patients were followed up after a median of 89 months (range, 3–103). Results: Main symptoms (defecatory disorders in 9 patients, vaginal mass in 6, perineal discomfort in 2) disappeared after surgery. Six patients performed digitation preoperatively and gave up digitation on defecation after surgery. Stool incontinence disappeared in 4 of 5 preoperatively incontinent patients (Cleveland clinic score, 5–12) and continence score improved from 5 to 2 in the remaining patient. Three patients with urinary cough incontinence preoperatively did not experience incontinence after surgery but cough incontinence occurred occasionally in an 81-year-old patient postoperatively. Rectocele demonstrated on defecography disappeared postoperatively in all 9 patients who underwent defecography. High threshold volume and maximum tolerable volume, which were observed preoperatively, decreased to control levels after surgery. Conclusion: Transvaginal anterior levatorplasty with posterior colporrhaphy might be an option for symptomatic rectocele to improve anorectal and urinary dysfunctions with morphological disorders.     

Constipation of anorectal outlet obstruction: pathophysiology, evaluation and management

Constipation is a subjective symptom of various pathological conditions. Incidence of constipation fluctuates from 2 to 30% in the general population. Approximately 50% of constipated patients referred to tertiary care centers have obstructed defecation constipation. Constipation of obstructed defecation may be due to mechanical causes or functional disorders of the anorectal region. Mechanical causes are related to morphological abnormalities of the anorectum (megarectum, rectal prolapse, rectocele, enterocele, neoplasms, stenosis). Functional disorders are associated with neurological disorders and dysfunction of the pelvic floor muscles or anorectal muscles (anismus, descending perineum syndrome, Hirschsprung's disease). However, this type of constipation should be differentiated by colonic slow transit constipation which, if coexists, should be managed to a second time. Assessment of patients with severe constipation includes a good history, physical examination and specialized investigations (colonic transit time, anorectal manometry, rectal balloon expulsion test, defecography, electromyography), which contribute to the diagnosis and the differential diagnosis of the cause of the obstructed defecation. Thereby, constipated patients can be given appropriate treatment for their problem, which may be conservative (bulk agents, high-fiber diet or laxatives), biofeedback training or surgery.     

Clinical and Morphologic Correlation after Stapled Transanal Rectal Resection for Obstructed Defecation Syndrome

Purpose  The clinical and morphologic outcome of patients with obstructed defecation syndrome after stapled transanal rectal resection was prospectively evaluated. Methods  Twenty-four consecutive patients (22 women; median age, 61 (range, 36–74) years) who suffered from obstructed defecation syndrome and with rectal redundancy on magnetic resonance defecography were enrolled in the study. Constipation was assessed by using the Cleveland Constipation Score. Morphologic changes were determined by using closed-configuration magnetic resonance defecography before and after stapled transanal rectal resection. Results  After a median follow-up of 18 (range, 6–36) months, Cleveland Constipation Score significantly decreased from 11 (range, 1–23) preoperatively to 5 (range, 1–15) postoperatively (P = 0.02). In 15 of 20 patients, preexisting intussusception was no longer visible in the magnetic resonance defecography. Anterior rectoceles were significantly reduced in depth, from 30 mm to 23 mm (P = 0.01), whereas the number of detectable rectoceles did not significantly change. Complications occurred in 6 of the 24 patients; however, only two were severe (1 bleeding and 1 persisting pain requiring reintervention). Conclusions  Clinical improvement of obstructed defecation syndrome after stapled transanal rectal resection correlates well with morphologic correction of the rectal redundancy, whereas correction of intussusception seems to be of particular importance in patients with obstructed defecation syndrome. Presented at  Presented at the Congress of the Swiss Surgical Society, Basel, Switzerland, May 28 to 30, 2008.     

Transanal rectocele repair using EndoGIA: short–term results of a prospective study

Background The surgical treatment of symptomatic rectocele may be carried out by means of endorectal techniques. Results depend on a correct etiologic evaluation of associated diseases. We report the preliminary results of an original endorectal technique applied to selected patients. Methods Fifteen women (median age, 57 years; range, 38–73 years) underwent transanal rectocele resection by a 60 mm endo–GIA and subsequent plication of the anterior rectal wall. All patients had a primary isolated anterior medium sublevator rectocele with obstructed defecation symptoms. They were prospectively evaluated by questionnaire, defecation diary, clinical examination, defecography and anal manometry were performed preoperatively. All patients had less than three weekly bowel motions. Postoperative follow–up included clinical examination and symptoms questionnaire with defecation diary at one week, one month and three months; defecography was performed at three months. Results The time required to repair the rectocele was approximately 20 min. The mean time spent in hospital after the operation was 37 h. Postoperative pain was low or moderate in all cases, one patient had acute urinary retention, 11 had minor rectal bleeding, and 5 had temporary urgency. Abolition of excessive straining, feeling of incomplete evacuation, enemas and self–digitations was achieved in all patients; stool frequency at three months was 7 per week in 10 patients, 5–6 per week in 3 patients and 4–6 in 2 patients (p<0.001). Defecography at three months did not show any rectocele recurrence. Conclusions Transanal rectocele repair with linear stapler applied in selected patients is safe and easy to perform. Short–term results are safisfactory. Complete investigations of impaired defecation and selection of patients are needed to achieve satisfactory results.     

Outcomes of Stapled Transanal Rectal Resection vs. Biofeedback for the Treatment of Outlet Obstruction Associated with Rectal Intussusception and Rectocele: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Purpose  This study was designed to assess the safety and outcomes achieved with stapled transanal rectal resection vs. biofeedback training in obstructed defecation patients. Methods  A total of 119 women patients who suffered from obstructed defecation with associated rectocele and rectal intussusception were randomized to stapled transanal rectal resection or biofeedback training. Stapled transanal rectal resection was performed by using two circular staplers to produce transanal full-thickness rectal resection. Primary outcome was symptoms of obstructed defecation resolution at 12 months; secondary outcomes included safety, change in quality of life score, and anatomic correction of rectocele and rectal intussusception. Results  Fourteen percent (8/59) stapled transanal rectal resection and 50 percent (30/60) biofeedback training patients withdrew early. Eight (15 percent) patients treated with stapled transanal rectal resection and 1 (2 percent) biofeedback patient experienced adverse events. One serious adverse event (bleeding) occurred after stapled transanal rectal resection. Scores of obstructed defecation improved significantly in both groups as did quality of life (both P < 0.0001). Successful treatment was observed in 44 (81.5 percent) stapled transanal rectal resection vs. 13 (33.3 percent) evaluable biofeedback training patients (P < 0.0001). Functional benefit was observed early and remained stable during the study. Conclusions  In this controlled trial, stapled transanal rectal resection was well tolerated, was more effective than biofeedback training for the resolution of obstructed defecation symptoms, and improved quality of life, with minimal risk of impaired continence. Thus, stapled transanal rectal resection offers a new treatment alternative for obstructed defecation after failure of conservative measures including biofeedback training, a noninvasive approach. Supported by grants from Ethicon Endo-Surgery (Europe) GmbH, Norderstedt, Germany. Presented at the meeting of the European Society of Colo-Proctology (ESCP), Malta, September 26 to 29, 2007. An erratum to this article can be found at     

Clinical and functional evaluation of patients with rectocele and mucosal prolapse treated with transanal repair of rectocele and rectal mucosectomy with a single circular stapler (TRREMS)

Background  

The aim of the present study was to make a preoperative and postoperative clinical and functional evaluation of patients who underwent transanal repair of rectocele and rectal mucosectomy with a single circular stapler (TRREMS procedure) as treatment for obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) caused by rectocele and rectal mucosal prolapse (RMP).     

Relationship between anatomic and symptomatic long-term results after rectocele repair for impaired defecation

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the long-term symptomatic and anatomic results of rectocele repair for impaired defecation. METHODS: All 26 females operated on during a five-year period in one hospital were reviewed in clinic. Follow-up was available on 22 patients after a median of 27 (range, 5–54) months. Interview, anorectal physiological testing, and evacuation proctography were performed preoperatively and postoperatively. Fifteen patients had a transperineal repair and seven patients had a transanal repair. RESULTS: Sixteen (73 percent) patients felt improved. A feeling of incomplete emptying (19vs. 10, preoperativevs. postoperative;P=0.02) and the need to use digital assistance vaginally (13vs. 6;P=0.07) were both reduced by surgery, the former being improved significantly more often after transperineal repair. The rectocele width and area were reduced by both types of surgery; however, the rectocele diameter was greater than 2 cm in 16 patients preoperatively and 10 patients postoperatively. There was no significant difference between patients who did or did not feel improved by surgery in the percentage reduction in rectocele width (22vs. 18 percent;P=0.95), the percentage reduction in rectocele area (65vs. 62 percent;P=0.95), or a rectocele width of more than 2 cm (44vs. 50 percent;P=0.80), didvs. did not feel improved, respectively. CONCLUSION: Operative repair symptomatically improves a majority of patients with impaired defecation associated with a large rectocele, but the improvement probably relates at least in part to factors other than the dimensions of the rectocele.     

Selection criteria for anterior rectal wall repair in symptomatic rectocele and anterior rectal wall prolapse

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to determine the outcome and changes produced by an endorectal anterior wall repair in objective functional parameters using anorectal manometry and defecography and to asses their usefulness in the selection of patients for the operation. METHODS: Between 1986 and 1990, we performed a prospective study of 76 consecutive patients with symptomatic rectocele and/or an anterior rectal wall prolapse. All patients were studied prospectively according to a fixed protocol. Standard questionnaire, defecation diary, clinical examination, defecography, and anal manometry were performed preoperatively and three to four months postoperatively. RESULTS: Three months postoperatively, 38 patients (50 percent) had no complaints at all (excellent result), 32 (42 percent) had only a minor complaint (good result), and in 6 patients (8 percent) the complaints were essentially unchanged (unsatisfactory result). After one year, similar figures were obtained. The postoperative mean stool frequency in all patients after three months was significantly increased (P <0.05) but not after one year. Postoperative defecographies showed a complete absence or significant diminution of the rectocele at three months and were significantly correlated with relief of symptoms. An inverse correlation was found between improvement in incontinence grade after operation and (larger) preoperative volume at which urge to defecate was elicited, making it a good predictor of improvement in incontinence by the operation. CONCLUSIONS: The anterior rectal wall repair positively influences rectal sensation in patients with incontinence and/or obstructed defecation caused by a rectocele and/or an anterior rectal wall prolapse. Anorectal manometry was useful in studying the beneficial physiologic effects of the endorectal repair. In patients with no previous pelvic surgery, a large urge to defecate volume is a good predictor of a good clinical outcome.     

Laparoscopic or Transanal Repair of Rectocele? A Retrospective Matched Cohort Study

PURPOSE The aim of the study was to analyze the functional and physiologic outcome of patients undergoing laparoscopic rectocele repair compared to a matched cohort undergoing transanal repair.METHODS Forty patients with a rectocele who had undergone laparoscopic pelvic floor repair by a laparoscopic gynecologist were matched for age and rectocele size with 40 patients who had undergone a transanal repair by a colorectal surgeon. All patients had clinical evidence of a symptomatic rectocele. All patients were assessed postoperatively with a quality of life (SF-36) score, a modified St. Marks continence score, a urinary dysfunction score, a Watts sexual dysfunction score, and a linear analog patient satisfaction score. Fifteen patients in each group had also undergone preoperative and postoperative anal manometry.RESULTS At 44 months median follow-up, the transanal approach resulted in significantly more patients reporting bowel symptom alleviation (P < 0.002) and higher patient satisfaction (P < 0.003). The bowel symptom improvement was also sustained over a significantly longer period (P < 0.03). Only 11 patients (28 percent) in the laparoscopic group reported more than 50 percent improvement in their bowel symptoms compared to 25 patients (63 percent) in the transanal group. On univariate analysis of 50 percent bowel symptom improvement, a larger rectocele (P < 0.009), transanal repair (P < 0.02), and presenting with obstructive defecation rather than fecal incontinence (P < 0.03) were statistically significant. Rectocele size (P < 0.012) and treatment cohort (P < 0.006) remained significant on multivariate analysis. Postoperatively, bowel symptom alleviation correlated with patient satisfaction in both groups (P < 0.015). Although not statistically significant, five patients (13 percent) in the transanal group developed postoperative fecal incontinence, which was associated with a low maximum anal resting pressure preoperatively that was further diminished postoperatively (P > 0.06). Only one patient (3 percent) in the laparoscopic group reported a decline in fecal continence, but four patients (10 percent) reported worsening of their symptoms of obstructed defecation. Postoperative dyspareunia was reported by 24 patients in total (30 percent), with significantly more in the transanal group (P > 0.05).CONCLUSIONS The transanal repair results in a statistically greater alleviation of bowel symptoms and greater patient satisfaction scores. However, this approach may have a greater degree of functional co-morbidity than the laparoscopic rectocele repair.The work was supported by grants from The Harry Triguboff Research Scholarship, Sydney Colorectal Associates, Sydney, Australia.This study was presented at the Australian Gynecologic Endoscopy Society Annual Scientific Meeting, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, May 21 to 24, 2003.Reprints are not available.     

Anal Continence After Rectocele Repair

INTRODUCTION: Rectocele may be associated with both chronic constipation and anal incontinence. Several different surgical procedures have been advocated for rectocele repair. The aim of the present study was to evaluate anorectal function and clinical outcome in a consecutive series of patients who underwent selected endorectal or transperineal surgery for rectocele for whom operative treatment was determined by clinical and proctographic features. Attention was paid to the cohort of rectocele patients presenting with incontinence as a leading symptom. METHODS: Sixty consecutive patients with symptomatic rectocele underwent surgical treatment at our institution. Fifty-eight of the patients were female (mean age 56; range, 21–70 years). Incontinence was graded according to a previously reported scoring system that accounts for the type and frequency of incontinence episodes. Preoperative anorectal manometry was performed using an open perfused polyethylene probe. Rectal sensation was recorded by balloon distention. Endoanal ultrasonography was performed with a 7.5-MHz probe. Preoperative defecography was performed at rest and on maximal squeeze and straining. Patients with obstructed defecation as their principal symptom, with associated mucosal rectal prolapse, underwent an endorectal procedure. For patients with associated anal incontinence (Grade B2 or greater), and without a rectal mucosal prolapse, a transperineal approach was performed with either an anterior external overlapping sphincteroplasty or levatorplasty. The median follow-up was 48 (range, 9–122) months. RESULTS: There was no operative mortality. Postoperative complications occurred in 18 patients (30 percent). Of 43 patients with incontinence, 34 (79 percent) were available for postoperative evaluation. None were fully continent. However, in 25 patients (73.5 percent), continence improved after surgery; half had only mucus soiling or loss of gas. Incontinence scores decreased (i.e., improved) from 4.8 ± 0.9 to 3.9 ± 0.9 (P = 0.002). A significant improvement was found both after transanal and perineal procedures. Only ten initially continent patients were available for postoperative assessment. All patients stated that they had clinical improvement in constipation. Their preoperative mean anal resting pressure was 62.5 ± 3.9 (standard error of the mean) mmHg, with a postoperative mean of 75.5 ± 7 mmHg. The preoperative mean squeeze pressure was 83.1 ± 8.5 mmHg, with a mean postoperative squeeze pressure of 88.5 ± 7.9 mmHg (P = not significant). The maximal tolerable volumes were all within normal limits, confirming the proctographic evidence that there were no cases of megarectum in our patient series. The pudendal nerve terminal motor latency was abnormal in all but two patients with incontinence (mean pudendal nerve terminal motor latency = 3.1; range, 1.2–4 milliseconds). Rectoceles recurred in six patients (10 percent): five after a Block procedure and one after a Sarles-type operation. The postoperative endosonographic appearance varied according to the nature of the procedure performed. CONCLUSION: There are few data concerning patients with rectocele who have associated anal incontinence, however, surgical decision analysis resulted in improvement in both constipation and incontinence in the majority of our patients with rectocele. Nevertheless, because none of the patients gained full continence postoperatively, pelvic floor rehabilitation might be also needed to achieve better sphincter function in patients with incontinence.     

Rectal diverticulum: a new complication of STARR procedure for obstructed defecation

We report a case of rectal diverticulum developed after stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) procedure for obstructed defecation. A 21-year-old woman with chronic constipation was diagnosed with a rectocele at defecography. The patient underwent STARR procedure. Six months later, she presented with severe constipation requiring enemas and a worse condition than that preoperatively. Defecography and rectoscopy revealed a rectal wall diverticulum cavity with incomplete elimination of barium enema. The patient underwent transanal diverticulectomy and direct rectal wall repair. STARR procedure can produce new and difficult-to-treat complications and should be reserved for expert colorectal surgeons with proved familiarity in transanal surgery.     

Fecal continence after rectocele repair: a prospective study

Combined transvaginal/transanal rectocele repair was performed in series of 89 consecutive women (mean age 55, range 35–81 years) with obstructed defecation due to a rectocele with a depth of more than 3 cm. The impact of this procedure on anal sphincter pressure and continence status was evaluated prospectively. Anorectal manometry was carried out before and after surgery (at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months). The following measurements were performed: maximal anal resting pressure (MARP), maximal anal squeeze pressure (MASP), and rectal sensory perception including first initial sensation, urge to defecate, and maximum tolerable volumes (MTV). The outcome was successful in 71% of patients with respect to symptoms such as the need for straining at defecation, manual assistance, feelings of incomplete evacuation, sense of rectal fullness, constipation, abdominal pain, and the use of laxatives. However, after rectocele repair seven patients experienced deterioration in fecal continence, and dyspareunia developed in 41% of the sexually active patients. Manometric studies revealed a significant decline in mean of 18% of MARP and 16% of MASP. In contrast to MASP, MARP gradually improved during the follow-up period. Distending volumes required for initial sensation and urge to defecate did not change after the procedure. MTV values were significantly lower 3 and 6 months after rectocele repair than those before and 24 months after surgery. MARP and MASP values after surgery did not differ between patients with impaired and those with normal continence. In conclusion, transvaginal/transanal rectocele repair is beneficial for patients with obstructed defecation; however, care should be taken in sexually active patients, and patients at risk of developing fecal incontinence. Accepted: 24 November 1999     

Transanal approach to rectocele repair may compromise anal sphincter pressures

PURPOSE: This study prospectively assessed the functional results, particularly anal sphincter impairment, following transanal repair of rectocele for chronic intractable constipation. METHOD: Twenty-one consecutive women (mean age, 47.7 (standard error of the mean, 2.7) years) had the diagnosis of rectocele obstructing defecation made on synchronized anal manometry, electromyography, and cinedefecography. All underwent a standardized transanal repair with controlled anal stretching (maximum of 4 cm) from self-retaining anal retractors. The clinical function and anorectal manometry were assessed before surgery and were repeated six months later. RESULTS: All 21 patients were subjectively satisfied with the relief from constipation after surgery. There were significant improvements in the straining at defecation (before, n=19; after, n=3;P=0.001), need to digitate per vagina (before, n=16; after, n=0;P=0.001), stool frequency (before, 3.8 (0.7) times weekly; after, 8.6 (1.2);P=0.004), and laxative requirements (before, n=7; after, n=0;P=0.03). Although none were clinically incontinent, there was a mean 28 mmHg impairment in resting (P<0.05) and 42.6 mmHg impairment in maximum squeeze anal pressures (P<0.05) after operations. There was no other morbidity. CONCLUSION: Transanal rectocele repair effectively improves constipation problems, at the risk of impaired anal sphincter function. Although clinical incontinence was minimum, an alternative approach to rectocele repair should be considered when anal sphincters are lax.     

Stapled Transanal Rectal Resection Under Laparoscopic Surveillance for Rectocele and Concomitant Enterocele

Purpose Stapled transanal rectal resection recently became a recommended surgical procedure for obstructed defecation syndrome. One problem when using a transanal stapling device for rectal surgery is the potential threat to structures located in front of the anterior rectal wall. We decided to perform a combined procedure of transanal rectal resection with a simultaneous laparoscopy for patients with obstructed defecation syndrome and an enterocele. Methods Between November 2002 and May 2005 a total of 41 patients were treated surgically for obstructed defecation syndrome. Four patients with concomitant enterocele underwent stapled transanal rectal resection under laparoscopic surveillance. Before surgery all patients underwent preoperative assessment, including clinical examination, colonoscopy, conventional video defecography, dynamic magnetic resonance imaging defecography, gynecology examinations, and psychologic evaluation. Results The mean operative time was 50 (±16.5) minutes for the conventional stapled transanal rectal resection and 67 (±14.1) minutes for combined laparoscopy and stapled transanal rectal resection (P < 0.01). Three major complications were observed: two had bleeding in the staple line (one from each group) and one had a late abscess in the staple line. Conclusions The combination of the stapled transanal rectal resection procedure and laparoscopy provides the opportunity to perform transanal rectal resection without the threat of intra-abdominal lesions caused by enterocele. Reprints are not available.     

Does surgical repair of a rectocele improve rectal emptying?

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to assess results of surgical repair of rectocele and to identify possible determinants of outcome from patient's history and preoperative defecography. Another aim was to evaluate how surgery affects rectal evacuation. METHOD: Thirty-four women with constipation and rectal emptying difficulties underwent surgery with a transanal technique. A preoperative defecography was performed in each patient. They were followed up after a median of 10 (range, 2–60) months with a questionnaire (n=34) and a defecography (n=31). Computer-based image analysis of defecographies was used to evaluate rectal evacuation. RESULTS: In 27 patients (79 percent), the result of surgery was good with subjectively improved emptying. The need for vaginal or perineal digitation preoperatively was related to a good result (P <0.05), whereas a previous hysterectomy (P <0.01) and a large rectal area on defecography (P <0.01) related to a poor result. Preoperative use of enemas, motor stimulants, or several types of laxatives also related to a poor outcome (P <0.05). Surgical treatment resulted in reduction of the rectocele (P <0.001), an elevated position of the anorectal junction (P <0.05), and improved rectal evacuation on defecographies (P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical repair reduces the size of the rectocele and improves rectal emptying. These changes are accompanied by a symptomatic improvement in the majority of patients. Preoperative patient data and defecography may help in selecting patients for surgery.