Association Between Frailty and Preoperative Decision-Making in Rectal Prolapse Repair
- PMID: 39733470
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2024.11.038
Association Between Frailty and Preoperative Decision-Making in Rectal Prolapse Repair
Abstract
Introduction: Abdominal and perineal repairs for rectal prolapse are offered to patients based on surgeon assessment of risk. Interpretations of risk can vary. We sought to understand how the preoperative Risk Analysis Index (RAI) score, a validated measure of frailty, aligned with our existing decision-making process for rectal prolapse repair.
Methods: Rectal prolapse repair cases were recorded in an Institutional Review Board approved registry from 2017 to 2022. Abdominal and perineal operations were determined based on an experienced surgeon's recommendation. The preoperative RAI was collected; a score≥30 indicates significant frailty. Preoperative and postoperative characteristics were compared using t-tests and Fisher's exact tests.
Results: About 130 patients underwent abdominal repairs and 51 underwent perineal repairs. Perineal patients were more often frail (abdominal: 9 [7%] versus perineal: 21 [41%], P < 0.001) and had a higher rate of cardiac comorbidities (abdominal: 42 [32%] versus perineal: 35 [69%], P < 0.001). A similar share of patients were undergoing repair for recurrent prolapse (abdominal: n = 29 [22%] versus perineal: n = 11 [22%], P > 0.99). Perineal repair patients were more likely to need assistance with mobility (n = 24 [47%]) and live in a facility (n = 15 [29%]). Patients in both groups recovered well (complication rate abdominal: 28 [22%] versus 11 [22%], P > 0.99) and were satisfied with postoperative outcomes (Patient Global Impression of Change score abdominal: 6 [interquartile range: 6, 7] versus perineal: 6 [5, 7], P = 0.12). Recurrence rates were higher after perineal repair (abdominal: 12 [9%] versus perineal: 20 [39%], P < 0.001).
Conclusions: Most abdominal repair patients were not frail, but many nonfrail patients underwent perineal operations based on surgeon perception of comorbidities. Using the RAI tool may provide an opportunity to guide decision-making around operative approach for rectal prolapse and overcome potential surgeon bias.
Keywords: Frailty; Rectal prolapse; Shared decision-making.
Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Is the abdominal repair of rectal prolapse safer than perineal repair in the highest risk patients? An NSQIP analysis.Dis Colon Rectum. 2012 Nov;55(11):1167-72. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e31826ab5e6. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012. PMID: 23044678
-
Surgical decision-making for rectal prolapse: one size does not fit all.Postgrad Med. 2020 Apr;132(3):256-262. doi: 10.1080/00325481.2019.1669330. Epub 2019 Sep 25. Postgrad Med. 2020. PMID: 31525304
-
Abdominal versus perineal approach for treatment of rectal prolapse: comparable safety in a propensity-matched cohort.Am Surg. 2013 Jul;79(7):686-92. Am Surg. 2013. PMID: 23816001
-
Surgical management of rectal prolapse.Arch Surg. 2005 Jan;140(1):63-73. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.140.1.63. Arch Surg. 2005. PMID: 15655208 Review.
-
Surgical management of rectal prolapse.Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007 Oct;4(10):552-61. doi: 10.1038/ncpgasthep0952. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007. PMID: 17909532 Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical