Prospective randomized trial of Ivalon sponge versus sutured rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse

Abstract

Ivalon sponge rectopexy is a safe reliable procedure in the management of rectal prolapse. Sutured rectopexy is simpler and avoids the use of foreign material. Sutured rectopexy is mandatory if synchronous resection is to be considered. Sixty-three patients (62 women) with full-thickness rectal prolapse were entered into a prospective randomized trial of Ivalon sponge rectopexy (31 patients) versus sutured rectopexy (32). Twenty patients (32 per cent) had coexistent incontinence (ten in each group). The operation was performed in the standard manner with a sutured rectangle of sponge or sutures alone placed along the length of the sacrum. Postoperative morbidity occurred in nine patients (14 per cent) of whom three underwent a sutured procedure and six Ivalon rectopexy: wound infection in three, chest infection in two, urinary tract infection in two and thromboembolism in two. There were no deaths within 30 days. At a median follow-up of 47 months prolapse had recurred in two patients (3 per cent), one in each group, 14 (22 per cent) suffered from incontinence (of whom five had undergone a sutured procedure), while 25 (40 per cent) had developed constipation (of whom 15 had received Ivalon rectopexy). The medium-term results of rectopexy by suture alone are equivalent to those obtained following the conventional Ivalon procedure. These data suggest that Ivalon rectopexy could now be abandoned.