Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1992 Feb;79(2):107-13.
doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800790205.

Abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a comparison of techniques

Affiliations

Abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a comparison of techniques

G S Duthie et al. Br J Surg. 1992 Feb.

Abstract

To compare the methods of abdominal rectopexy and to elucidate the mechanism by which rectopexy restores continence in patients with rectal prolapse, the role of sphincter recovery, rectal morphological changes and improved rectal sensation were assessed in 68 patients (eight men, 60 women) of median age 63 (range 18-83) years undergoing resection rectopexy (n = 29), anterior and posterior Marlex rectopexy (n = 20), posterior Ivalon rectopexy (n = 9) or suture rectopexy (n = 10). Preoperative and postoperative manometry, radiology and electrosensitivity measurements were made. Age and duration of follow-up were similar in all groups and the prolapse was controlled in all patients. Significantly improved continence was seen in all but the Ivalon group. There was no evidence of increasing postoperative constipation. Sphincter length and voluntary contraction were unaltered, but improved resting tone was seen in the resection and suture groups. This was not seen in the prosthetic groups. Improved continence correlated with recovery of resting pressure. Upper and sensation was improved in all groups. Radiological changes did not correlate with improved continence. We conclude that continence is improved by all rectopexy procedures but seems better without prosthetic material. Sphincter recovery seems to be the most important factor.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Solla JA, Rothenberger DA, Goldberg SM. Colonic resection in the treatment of complete rectal prolapse. Neth J Surg 1989; 41: 132–5. - PubMed
    1. Watts JD, Rothenberger DA, Buls JG, Goldberg SM, Nivatvongs S. The management of procidentia: 30 years experience. Dis Colon Rectum 1985; 28: 96–102. - PubMed
    1. Mann CV, Hoffman C. Complete rectal prolapse: the anatomical and functional results of treatment by extended abdominal rectopexy. Br J Surg 1988; 75: 34–7. - PubMed
    1. Broden G, Dolk A, Holmstrom B. Recovery of the internal anal sphincter following rectopexy: a possible explanation for continence improvement. Int J Color Dis 1988; 3: 23–8. - PubMed
    1. Browning GGP, Parks AG. Postanal repair for neuropathic faecal incontinence: correlation of clinical result and anal canal pressures. Br J Surg 1983; 70: 101–4. - PubMed

Publication types