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
. 2005 Dec;27(5):414-9.
doi: 10.1007/s00276-005-0010-y. Epub 2005 Sep 1.

Digital assessment of lower rectum fixity in rectal prolapse (DALR): a simple clinical anatomical test to determine the most suitable approach (abdominal versus perineal) for repair

Affiliations

Digital assessment of lower rectum fixity in rectal prolapse (DALR): a simple clinical anatomical test to determine the most suitable approach (abdominal versus perineal) for repair

Deya Marzouk et al. Surg Radiol Anat. 2005 Dec.

Abstract

Selection of an appropriate approach to treat full thickness rectal prolapse remains problematic and controversial. We propose that rectal prolapse may be classified as 'low type' (true rectal prolapse) or 'high type' (intussusception of the sigmoid with a fixed lower rectum). This assessment can be made via a simple clinical test of digital rectal assessment of lower rectal fixity ('the hook test') based on anatomic changes in rectal prolapse to guide the selection process. In cases with the low-type prolapse, a perineal approach is appropriate (either Delorme's procedure, or rectosigmoidectomy with or without pelvic floor repair). For the high type, an abdominal rectopexy with or without high anterior resection is needed. Retrospective analysis of our cases treated over the last 6 years showed a recurrence rate of 6% in perineal procedures and 0% in abdominal rectopexy combined with resection to date. We believe that employing our simple test and classification can contribute to better patient selection for either approach, minimize anaesthetic and surgical risks and also result in lower recurrence rates.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. South Med J. 1997 Sep;90(9):925-32 - PubMed
    1. Am Surg. 2001 Jul;67(7):622-7 - PubMed
    1. Br J Surg. 1971 Nov;58(11):847-8 - PubMed
    1. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1999 Jun;9(3):235-8 - PubMed
    1. Dis Colon Rectum. 1984 Jun;27(6):356-9 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources