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
. 2014 Jan;10(1):18-22.
doi: 10.4103/0972-9941.124456.

A single centre comparative study of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy versus suture rectopexy

Manash Ranjan Sahoo  1 , Anil Kumar Thimmegowda  1 , Manoj S Gowda  1
Affiliations

A single centre comparative study of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy versus suture rectopexy

Manash Ranjan Sahoo et al. J Minim Access Surg. 2014 Jan.

Abstract

Aim: The aim of our study is to compare the results of laparoscopic mesh vs. suture rectopexy.

Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, 70 patients including both male and female of age ranging between 20 years and 65 years (mean 42.5 yrs) were subjected to laparoscopic rectopexy during the period between March 2007 and June 2012, of which 38 patients underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy and 32 patients laparoscopic suture rectopexy. These patients were followed up for a mean period of 12 months assessing first bowel movement, hospital stay, duration of surgery, faecal incontinence, constipation, recurrence and morbidity.

Results: Duration of surgery was 100.8 ± 12.4 minutes in laparoscopic suture rectopexy and 120 ± 10.8 min in laparoscopic mesh rectopexy. Postoperatively, the mean time for the first bowel movement was 38 hrs and 40 hrs, respectively, for suture and mesh rectopexy. Mean hospital stay was five (range: 4-7) days. There was no significant postoperative complication except for one port site infection in mesh rectopexy group. Patients who had varying degree of incontinence preoperatively showed improvement after surgery. Eleven out of 18 (61.1%) patients who underwent laparoscopic suture rectopexy as compared to nine of 19 (47.3%) patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy improved as regards constipation after surgery.

Conclusion: There were no significant difference in both groups who underwent surgery except for patients undergoing suture rectopexy had better symptomatic improvement of continence and constipation. Also, cost of mesh used in laparoscopic mesh rectopexy is absent in lap suture rectopexy group. To conclude that laparoscopic suture rectopexy is a safe and feasible procedure and have comparable results as regards operative time, morbidity, bowel function, cost and recurrence or even slightly better results than mesh rectopexy.

Keywords: Laparoscopy; mesh rectopexy; presacral fascia; rectal prolapse; suture rectopexy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Opening the peritoneum on the right side to enter holy plane
Figure 2
Figure 2
Dissection of rectum up to the pelvic floor
Figure 3
Figure 3
Taking a bite in the presacral fascia over sacral promontory to fix the rectum
Figure 4
Figure 4
Fixing of mesh posterior to rectum to presacral fascia
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Bachoo P, Brazzelli M, Grant A. Surgery for completerectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000:CD001758. - PubMed
    1. Chiu HH, Chen JB, Wang HM, Tsai CY, Chao TH. Surgical treatment for rectal prolapse. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi (Taipei) 2001;64:95–100. - PubMed
    1. Boccasanta P, Venturi M, Reitano MC, Salamina G, Rosati R, Montorsi M, et al. Laparotomic vs. laparoscopic rectopexy in complete rectalprolapse. Dig Surg. 1999;16:415–9. - PubMed
    1. Heah SM, Hartley JE, Hurley J, Duthie GS, Monson JR. Laparoscopic suture rectopexy without resection iseffective treatment for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:638–43. - PubMed
    1. Kellokumpu IH, Kairaluoma M. Laparoscopic repair of rectal prolapse: Surgical technique. Ann Chir Gynaecol. 2001;90:66–9. - PubMed