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
. 2012 Apr;27(4):489-95.
doi: 10.1007/s00384-011-1332-3. Epub 2011 Nov 9.

Quality of life after laparoscopic resection rectopexy

Affiliations

Quality of life after laparoscopic resection rectopexy

Mia Kim et al. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012 Apr.

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated continence, constipation, and quality of life (QoL) after laparoscopic resection rectopexy (LRR) for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Results were compared with existing data after perineal rectosigmoidectomy (PRS).

Methods: From May 2003 to February 2008, consecutive patients suffering from full-thickness rectal prolapse undergoing LRR were retrospectively studied. A standardized questionnaire including the Cleveland Clinic Constipation and Incontinence Scores (CCCS and CCIS) as well as general and constipation-related QoL scores (EQ-5D and PAC-QOL) was administered. Results were compared with those after PRS. For statistic analysis, the Wilcoxon test (EQ-5D and EQ-VAS) and two-sample Student's t test (CCCS, CCIS, and PAC-QOL) were used for LRR, for the comparison of both procedures Mann-Whitney test (EQ-5D) and two-sample Student's t test (EQ-VAS, CCCS, CCIS, and PAC-QOL).

Results: Eighteen patients, 15 female, aged 58.1 (±20.2) years underwent LRR. Eleven patients completed follow-up. Postoperatively, neither functional outcome nor QoL improved. Two recurrences occurred, morbidity was n = 2, and mortality n = 1. In comparison, patients after PRS benefit from improved constipation, general QoL measures, status of health, and all dimensions of constipation-related QoL.

Conclusions: Patients after LRR do not benefit from improved general nor constipation-related QoL nor improved functional results compared to PRS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. World J Surg. 2010 May;34(5):1116-22 - PubMed
    1. Mil Med. 2005 Sep;170(9):743-7 - PubMed
    1. Dis Colon Rectum. 1996 Jun;39(6):681-5 - PubMed
    1. Surg Today. 2005;35(6):446-52 - PubMed
    1. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2005 May;40(5):540-51 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources