-
Colorectal Disease : the Official... Dec 2020Rectal prolapse is an uncommon but debilitating pelvic floor disorder that significantly decreases the quality of life of affected patients. Perineal stapled prolapse... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
Rectal prolapse is an uncommon but debilitating pelvic floor disorder that significantly decreases the quality of life of affected patients. Perineal stapled prolapse resection is a relatively new perineal approach that offers an promising alternative technique in the surgical management of rectal prolapse. It appears to be a simple, reproducible and efficient method. However, long-term outcomes are limited. The aims of this review are to assess the safety and effectiveness of perineal stapled prolapse resection in the management of rectal prolapse.
METHOD
A systematic review of all articles describing this approach was searched using MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Included in this review were all randomized and nonrandomized prospective and retrospective studies reporting patients (aged 16 years and older) with complete rectal prolapse who underwent perineal stapled prolapse resection for the surgical treatment of the rectal prolapse.
RESULTS
A total of 408 patients across 20 articles were included. There were 58 cases of recurrence out of 368 patients over a median length of follow-up of 18 months (interquartile range 12-34 months). The total weighted overall recurrence was 12%. There were 51 cases of postoperative complications in 350 cases, bleeding being the most common complication.
CONCLUSION
The recurrence rate is comparable to those of the well-established Altemeier and Delorme procedures. However, given the heterogeneity of studies and variations in lengths of follow-up, further randomized prospective studies are needed to adequately compare this technique against other procedures for complete rectal prolapse.
Topics: Humans; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Rectal Prolapse; Rectum; Recurrence; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32865320
DOI: 10.1111/codi.15338 -
European Urology Focus Mar 2021Genital reconstructive surgery (GRS) is a necessary part of transitioning for many transwomen, and there is evidence of positive effects on a person's well-being and... (Review)
Review
Genital Reconstructive Surgery in Male to Female Transgender Patients: A Systematic Review of Primary Surgical Techniques, Complication Profiles, and Functional Outcomes from 1950 to Present Day.
CONTEXT
Genital reconstructive surgery (GRS) is a necessary part of transitioning for many transwomen, and there is evidence of positive effects on a person's well-being and sexual function. Surgical techniques have evolved, from pursuing aesthetic outcome to now functional outcome with natal females as the standard.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the evidence, identifying the surgical techniques used in primary GRS, their complications, functional outcomes, and the tools used to assess them.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The clinical question was designed using the standard PICOS format. The search complied with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2009 statement and was performed by two independent reviewers.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Europe, USA, and Thailand favour the penoscrotal technique for vaginoplasty, whereas in the UK, the penile inversion (PI) technique predominates. Primary vaginoplasty using a segment of bowel is less common, and all three techniques have comparable rates of intraoperative rectal injury. The incidence of rectovaginal fistula is reportedly higher in the PI technique. Wound haematoma and vaginal prolapse rates are comparable. Higher rates of clitoral necrosis, urethral meatal stenosis, and wound infection are reported in PI. However, the ability to orgasm, ability to have penetrative sexual intercourse, and satisfaction with aesthetic result are better with PI.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence for GRS complications and functional outcomes is of low level. Standardised nomenclature reporting of adverse events and robust patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are lacking. PROMs are a powerful assessment tool, and standardised definitions of adverse events and functional outcomes should be a priority of future research.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We looked at all studies published on genital reconstructive surgery from 1950 to the present day. We assessed each surgical technique and their associated complication rates, sexual and urinary function outcomes, and how they were reported. We found the evidence to be low and weak. We suggest more robust ways of reporting complications, and the impact on patients' quality of life should be investigated.
Topics: Europe; Female; Genitalia; Genitalia, Female; Genitalia, Male; Humans; Male; Quality of Life; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Transgender Persons
PubMed: 32061539
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.01.004 -
International Urogynecology Journal Sep 2019Several posterior compartment surgical approaches are used to address posterior vaginal wall prolapse and obstructed defecation. We aimed to compare outcomes for both...
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS
Several posterior compartment surgical approaches are used to address posterior vaginal wall prolapse and obstructed defecation. We aimed to compare outcomes for both conditions among different surgical approaches.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed comparing the impact of surgical interventions in the posterior compartment on prolapse and defecatory symptoms. MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 4 April 2018. Randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective comparative and single-group studies of women undergoing posterior vaginal compartment surgery for vaginal bulge or bowel symptoms were included. Studies had to include both anatomical and symptom outcomes both pre- and post-surgery.
RESULTS
Forty-six eligible studies reported on six surgery types. Prolapse and defecatory symptoms improved with native-tissue transvaginal rectocele repair, transanal rectocele repair, and stapled transanal rectocele repair (STARR) surgeries. Although prolapse was improved with sacrocolpoperineopexy, defecatory symptoms worsened. STARR caused high rates of fecal urgency postoperatively, but this symptom typically resolved with time. Site-specific posterior repairs improved prolapse stage and symptoms of obstructed defecation. Compared with the transanal route, native-tissue transvaginal repair resulted in greater improvement in anatomical outcomes, improved obstructed defecation symptoms, and lower chances of rectal injury, but higher rates of dyspareunia.
CONCLUSIONS
Surgery in the posterior vaginal compartment typically has a high rate of success for anatomical outcomes, obstructed defecation, and bulge symptoms, although these may not persist over time. Based on this evidence, to improve anatomical and symptomatic outcomes, a native-tissue transvaginal rectocele repair should be preferentially performed.
Topics: Constipation; Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectocele; Retrospective Studies; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Vagina
PubMed: 31256222
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-019-04001-z -
Techniques in Coloproctology Jun 2019Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) is a treatment with promising results in external rectal prolapse, rectal intussusception, and rectocele. Because of the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) is a treatment with promising results in external rectal prolapse, rectal intussusception, and rectocele. Because of the emergence of robotic-assisted surgery and the technical advantage it provides, we examined the potential role and place of robotic surgery in ventral rectopexy.
METHODS
MEDLINE, PubMed, and other databases were searched, by two independent reviewers, to identify studies comparing robotic to laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy. The primary outcome was the rate of unplanned conversion to open. The secondary outcomes were morbidity, length of hospital stay and recurrence rate.
RESULTS
Five studies (4% male, n = 259) met the inclusion criteria. All 5 studies reported on conversion rate and showed no significant difference between the conversion rate of robotic and laparoscopic groups [OR 0.58 (95% CI 0.09-3.77)]. Robotic surgery was also similar to laparoscopic surgery for both morbidity [OR 0.71 (95% CI 0.34-1.48)] and recurrence rate [OR 0.56 (95% CI 0.18-1.75)]. Operative time was longer in the robotic group with a MWD of 22.88 minutes (CI 5.73-40.04, p < 0.0007). There was a statistically significant reduction in length of stay with robotic surgery [mean difference - 0.36 days (95% CI - 0.66 to - 0.07)].
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review shows that robotic-assisted ventral rectopexy requires longer operative time with no significant added benefit over laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. The conversion rate was low in both groups and the trends to benefit did not reach statistical significance. More studies are required to clarify whether the potential technical advantage of robotic surgery in ventral rectopexy translates to an improvement in clinical outcome.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Conversion to Open Surgery; Female; Humans; Intussusception; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Middle Aged; Operative Time; Rectal Diseases; Rectal Prolapse; Rectum; Recurrence; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Surgical Mesh; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31254202
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-019-02014-w -
Surgical Endoscopy Aug 2019Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) has proved effective in the treatment of internal and external rectal prolapse. The present meta-analysis aimed to determine... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Outcome of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for full-thickness external rectal prolapse: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis of the predictors for recurrence.
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) has proved effective in the treatment of internal and external rectal prolapse. The present meta-analysis aimed to determine the predictive factors of recurrence of full-thickness external rectal prolapse after LVMR.
METHODS
An organized, systematic search of electronic databases including PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochran library was conducted in adherence to PRISMA guidelines. Studies that reported the outcome of LVMR in patients with full-thickness external rectal prolapse were included according to predefined criteria. A meta-regression analysis and sub-group meta-analyses were performed to recognize the patient and technical factors that were associated with higher recurrence rates.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies comprising 1242 patients of a median age of 60 years were included. The median operation time was 122.3 min. Conversion to open surgery was required in 22 (1.8%) patients. The weighted mean complication rate across the studies was 12.4% (95% CI 8.4-16.4) and the weighted mean rate of recurrence of full-thickness external rectal prolapse was 2.8% (95% CI 1.4-4.3). The median follow-up duration was 23 months. Male gender (SE = 0.018, p = 0.008) and length of the mesh (SE = - 0.007, p = 0.025) were significantly associated with full-thickness recurrence of rectal prolapse. The weighted mean rates of improvement in fecal incontinence and constipation after LVMR were 79.3% and 71%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
LVMR is an effective and safe option in treatment of full-thickness external rectal prolapse with low recurrence and complication rates. Male patients and length of the mesh may potentially have a significant impact on recurrence of rectal prolapse after LVMR.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Prognosis; Rectal Prolapse; Rectum; Recurrence; Regression Analysis; Surgical Mesh
PubMed: 31041515
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06803-0 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2019A parastomal hernia is defined as an incisional hernia related to a stoma, and belongs to the most common stoma-related complications. Many factors, which are considered... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A parastomal hernia is defined as an incisional hernia related to a stoma, and belongs to the most common stoma-related complications. Many factors, which are considered to influence the incidence of parastomal herniation, have been investigated. However, it remains unclear whether the enterostomy should be placed through, or lateral to the rectus abdominis muscle, in order to prevent parastomal herniation and other important stoma complications.
OBJECTIVES
To assess if there is a difference regarding the incidence of parastomal herniation and other stoma complications, such as ileus and stenosis, in lateral pararectal versus transrectal stoma placement in people undergoing elective or emergency abdominal wall enterostomy.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched for all types of published and unpublished randomized and non-randomized studies in four medical databases: CENTRAL, PubMed, LILACS, Science Ciation Index, and two trials registers: ICTRP Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov to 9 November 2018. We applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized and non-randomized studies comparing lateral pararectal versus transrectal stoma placement with regard to parastomal herniation and other stoma-related complications.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. We conducted data analyses according to the recommendations of Cochrane and the Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group (CCCG). We rated quality of evidence according to the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Randomized controlled trials (RCT)Only one RCT met the inclusion criteria. The participants underwent enterostomy placement in the frame of an operation for: rectal cancer (37/60), ulcerative colitis (14/60), familial adenomatous polyposis (7/60), and other (2/60).The results between the lateral pararectal and the transrectal approach groups were inconclusive for the incidence of parastomal herniation (risk ratio (RR) 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 4.48; low-quality evidence); development of ileus or stenosis (RR 2.0, 95% CI 0.19 to 20.9; low-quality evidence); or skin irritation (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.13; moderate-quality evidence). The results were also inconclusive for the subgroup analysis in which we compared the effect of ileostomy versus colostomy on parastomal herniation. The study did not measured other stoma-related morbidities, or stoma-related mortality, but did measure quality of life, which was not one of our outcomes of interest.Non-randomized studies (NRS)Ten retrospective cohort studies, with a total of 864 participants, met the inclusion criteria. The indications for enterostomy placement and the baseline characteristics of the participants (age, co-morbidities, disease-severity) varied between studies. All included studies reported results for the primary outcome (parastomal herniation) and one study also reported data on one of the secondary outcomes (stomal prolapse).The effects of different surgical approaches on parastomal herniation (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.75; 10 studies, 864 participants; very low-quality evidence) and the occurrence of stomal prolapse (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.85; 1 study, 145 participants; very low-quality evidence) are uncertain.None of the included studies measured other stoma-related morbidity or stoma-related mortality.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The present systematic review of randomized and non-randomized studies found inconsistent results between the two compared interventions regarding their potential to prevent parastomal herniation.In conclusion, there is still a lack of high-quality evidence to support the ideal surgical technique of stoma formation. The available moderate-, low-, and very low-quality evidence, does not support or refute the superiority of one of the studied stoma formation techniques over the other.
Topics: Anastomosis, Surgical; Colostomy; Hernia, Ventral; Humans; Ileostomy; Prolapse; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectum; Rectus Abdominis; Surgical Stomas
PubMed: 31016723
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009487.pub3 -
Journal of Pediatric Surgery Sep 2019Rectal prolapse is a relatively common condition in infants and young children with a multifactorial etiology. Despite its prevalence, there remains clinical equipoise...
PURPOSE
Rectal prolapse is a relatively common condition in infants and young children with a multifactorial etiology. Despite its prevalence, there remains clinical equipoise with respect to secondary treatment in pediatric surgery literature. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate methods of secondary treatment currently used to treat rectal prolapse in children.
METHODS
We searched Pubmed, Medline, and Scopus with the terms "rectal prolapse" and "children" for papers published from 1990 to April 2017. Papers satisfying strict criteria were analyzed for patient demographics, intervention, efficacy, and complications. Procedures were grouped by like type. Pooled success rates were calculated.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies documenting 907 patients were included. Injection sclerotherapy had an overall initial success rate of 79.5%. Ethyl alcohol seemed the best sclerosing agent due to a high first-injection success rate, low complication rate, and ready accessibility. Several perineal repairs were found, with operative success rates ranging from 60.8%-100%. Laparoscopic rectopexy with mesh was the most commonly reported transabdominal procedure and had an overall success rate of 96.1%. Postoperative complications from all procedures were comparable.
CONCLUSION
Though many secondary treatment options have been reported for rectal prolapse, sclerotherapy and laparoscopic rectopexy predominate in contemporary literature and appear to have high success and low complication rates.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
IV.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Humans; Infant; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Prolapse; Sclerotherapy
PubMed: 30905414
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.03.002 -
Journal of Pediatric Surgery May 2019Sclerotherapy is a commonly utilized treatment for rectal prolapse in children. This study systematically evaluates the effectiveness and complications of various... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Sclerotherapy is a commonly utilized treatment for rectal prolapse in children. This study systematically evaluates the effectiveness and complications of various sclerosing agents in treating pediatric rectal prolapse.
METHODS
After protocol registration (CRD-42018088980), multiple databases were searched. Studies describing injection sclerotherapy for treatment of pediatric rectal prolapse were included, with screening and data abstraction duplicated. The methodological quality of included papers was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) score.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies were identified, published between 1970 and 2017. Most studies were single institution case series, with median "N" 57+/-88.9 and mean MINORS score of 0.51+/-0.17 (perfect score = 1). 1510 patients with a mean age of 4.5 years were accounted for: 36.2% female, most without comorbidities. Mean follow up length was 30 months. The most common sclerosing agent described was ethanol (45%), followed by phenol (33%). The mean number of treatments per patient was 1.1+/-0.34. The overall success rate after a single sclerotherapy treatment was 76.9%+/-8.8%. The overall complication rate was 14.4%+/-2%.
CONCLUSIONS
Injection sclerotherapy appears effective and low-risk in the treatment of pediatric rectal prolapse and should be considered before more invasive surgical options. The available evidence is of relatively poor quality, and prospective comparative investigations are warranted.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
3 (meta-analysis of level 3 studies).
Topics: Child; Humans; Rectal Prolapse; Sclerotherapy
PubMed: 30782440
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2019.01.033 -
Acta Bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis Dec 2018Shiga-toxin Escherichia coli productor (STEC) provokes frequently an important intestinal damage that may be considered in differential diagnosis with the onset of...
BACKGROUND
Shiga-toxin Escherichia coli productor (STEC) provokes frequently an important intestinal damage that may be considered in differential diagnosis with the onset of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). The aim of this work is to review in the current literature about Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS) and IBD symptoms at the onset, comparing the clinical presentation and symptoms, as the timing of diagnosis and of the correct treatment of both these conditions is a fundamental prognostic factor. A focus is made about the association between typical or atypical HUS and IBD and a possible renal involvement in patient with IBD (IgA-nephropathy).
METHODS
A systematic review of scientific articles was performed consulting the databases PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar, and consulting most recent textbooks of Pediatric Nephrology.
RESULTS
In STEC-associated HUS, that accounts for 90% of cases of HUS in children, the microangiopathic manifestations are usually preceded by gastrointestinal symptoms. Initial presentation may be considered in differential diagnosis with IBD onset. The transverse and ascending colon are the segments most commonly affected, but any area from the esophagus to the perianal area can be involved. The more serious manifestations include severe hemorrhagic colitis, bowel necrosis and perforation, rectal prolapse, peritonitis and intussusception. Severe gastrointestinal involvement may result in life-threatening complications as toxic megacolon and transmural necrosis of the colon with perforation, as in Ulcerative Colitis (UC). Transmural necrosis of the colon may lead to subsequent colonic stricture, as in Crohn Disease (CD). Perianal lesions and strictures are described. In some studies, intestinal biopsies were performed to exclude IBD. Elevation of pancreatic enzymes is common. Liver damage and cholecystitis are other described complications. There is no specific form of therapy for STEC HUS, but appropriate fluid and electrolyte management (better hyperhydration when possible), avoiding antidiarrheal drugs, and possibly avoiding antibiotic therapy, are recommended as the best practice. In atypical HUS (aHUS) gastrointestinal manifestation are rare, but recently a study evidenced that gastrointestinal complications are common in aHUS in presence of factor-H autoantibodies. Some report of patients with IBD and contemporary atypical-HUS were found, both for CD and UC. The authors conclude that deregulation of the alternative complement pathway may manifest in other organs besides the kidney. Finally, searching for STEC-infection, or broadly for Escherichia coli (E. coli) infection, and IBD onset, some reviews suggest a possible role of adherent invasive E. coli (AIEC) on the pathogenesis of IBD.
CONCLUSIONS
The current literature shows that gastrointestinal complications of HUS are quite exclusive of STEC-associated HUS, whereas aHUS have usually mild or absent intestinal involvement. Severe presentation as toxic megacolon, perforation, ulcerative colitis, peritonitis is similar to IBD at the onset. Moreover, some types of E. coli (AIEC) have been considered a risk factor for IBD. Recent literature on aHUS shows that intestinal complications are more common than described before, particularly for patients with anti-H factor antibodies. Moreover, we found some report of patient with both aHUS and IBD, who benefit from anti-C5 antibodies injection (Eculizumab).
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Anemia, Hemolytic; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Apoptosis; Atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome; Combined Modality Therapy; Contraindications, Drug; Diagnosis, Differential; Diarrhea; Escherichia coli Infections; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Granuloma; Hemolytic-Uremic Syndrome; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Necrosis; Shiga-Toxigenic Escherichia coli; Thrombocytopenia
PubMed: 30561409
DOI: 10.23750/abm.v89i9-S.7911 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Dec 2018To screen all treatments tested for solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS) without rectal prolapse and to assess their efficacy.
PURPOSE
To screen all treatments tested for solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS) without rectal prolapse and to assess their efficacy.
METHOD
A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines, focusing on the treatment of SRUS without rectal prolapse. The types of treatment and their efficacy were collected and critically assessed.
RESULTS
A selection of 20 studies among the 470 publications focusing on SRUS provided suitable data for a total of 516 patients. Only 2 studies were randomised prospective trials that focused on argon plasma treatment. The mean follow-up was 21.8 months and ranged from 0.25 to 90 months. Most of the studies focused on surgery, including rectopexy, stapled transanal rectal resection, excision of the ulcer, the Delorme procedure, proctectomy, low anterior resection, and ostomy. Populations of the studies were heterogeneous and selected outcomes were specific (failure of medical or surgical treatment). Conservative treatment (high-fibre diet, laxatives, change of defecatory habits, and biofeedback treatment) induced a symptomatic improvement in 71/91 patients (63.6%) and healing of mucosal lesion in 17/51 patients (33.3%). Surgeries (all types) improved SRUS in 77% (54-100%) of patients. Argon plasma coagulation is a promising technique but longer follow-up is necessary.
CONCLUSIONS
The general quality of the studies focusing on the treatment of SRUS was poor due to the heterogeneity of the population, the sample size of the cohorts, and the heterogeneity of efficacy assessments. The therapeutic approach appears to be multimodal and multidisciplinary and validated in centres of expertise. Further studies evaluating multimodal strategies are needed.
Topics: Consensus; Conservative Treatment; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Humans; Predictive Value of Tests; Rectal Diseases; Syndrome; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Ulcer
PubMed: 30206681
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-018-3162-z