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
Review
. 2020 Jul 30;4(3):89-99.
doi: 10.23922/jarc.2019-035. eCollection 2020.

Surgical Treatment of Rectal Prolapse in the Laparoscopic Era; A Review of the Literature

Affiliations
Review

Surgical Treatment of Rectal Prolapse in the Laparoscopic Era; A Review of the Literature

Akira Tsunoda. J Anus Rectum Colon. .

Abstract

Rectal prolapse is associated with debilitating symptoms including the discomfort of prolapsing tissue, mucus discharge, hemorrhage, and defecation disorders of fecal incontinence, constipation, or both. The aim of treatment is to eliminate the prolapse, correct associated bowel function and prevent new onset of bowel dysfunction. Historically, abdominal procedures have been indicated for young fit patients, whereas perineal approaches have been preferred in older frail patients with significant comorbidity. Recently, the laparoscopic procedures with their advantages of less pain, early recovery, and lower morbidity have emerged as an effective tool for the treatment of rectal prolapse. This article aimed to review the current evidence base for laparoscopic procedures and perineal procedures, and to compare the results of various techniques. As a result, laparoscopic procedures showed a relatively low recurrence rate than the perineal procedures with comparable complication rates. Laparoscopic resection rectopexy and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy had a small advantage in the improvement of constipation or the prevention of new-onset constipation compared with other laparoscopic procedures. However, the optimal surgical repair has not been clearly demonstrated because of the significant heterogeneity of available studies. An individualized approach is recommended for every patient, considering age, comorbidity, and the underlying anatomical and functional disorders.

Keywords: constipation; fecal incontinence; laparoscopic procedure; perineal procedure; rectal prolapse; recurrence.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest There are no conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Brodén B, Snellman B. Procidentia of the rectum studied with cineradiography. A contribution to the discussion of causative mechanism. Dis Colon Rectum. 1968 Sep-Oct; 11(5): 330-47. - PubMed
    1. Jacobs LK, Lin YJ, Orkin BA. The best operation for rectal prolapse. Surg Clin North Am. 1997 Feb; 77(1): 49-70. - PubMed
    1. Wassef R, Rothenberger DA, Goldberg SM. Rectal prolapse. Curr Probl Surg. 1986 Jun; 23(6): 397-451. - PubMed
    1. Loygue J, Nordlinger B, Cunci O, et al. Rectopexy to the promontory for the treatment of rectal prolapse. Report of 257 cases. Dis Colon Rectum. 1984 Jun; 27(6): 356-9. - PubMed
    1. Keighley MRB. Rectal Prolapse. In: Henry MM, Swash M, editors. Coloproctology and the pelvic floor. 2nd Ed. Oxford: Butterworth Heineman 1992. p. 316.