Users Online : 333 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

Laparoscopic posterior rectopexy for complete rectal prolapse: Is it the ideal procedure for males?


 Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, GEM Hospital and Research Centre, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India

Correspondence Address:
Senthil Kumar Ganapathi,
Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, GEM Hospital and Research Centre, 45 Pankaja Mill Road, Ramanathapuram, Coimbatore - 641 045, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_323_20

Background: Rectal prolapse is more common in elderly women worldwide, but in India, it predominantly occurs in young- and middle-aged males. While ventral mesh rectopexy is proposed as the preferred procedure in females, the debate on the best procedure in men is still wide open. Methods: A retrospective review of all adult male patients operated for external rectal prolapse (ERP) between January 2005 and December 2019 was performed. Patients either underwent modified laparoscopic posterior mesh rectopexy (LPMR) or laparoscopic resection rectopexy (LRR). The outcome was analysed in terms of recurrence, post-operative constipation, sexual dysfunction and other complications. Results: A total of 118 male patients were included (LPMR: 106, LRR: 12). The mean age was 46.2 years (standard deviation [SD] 11.8, range: 21–88). The mean operating time was 108 min (SD: 24). The mean length of hospital stay was 4.8 days (SD: 1.4, range: 3–11 days). There was no anastomotic leak in the LRR group. Other complications included wound infection (n = 2), mesh infection with sigmoid colon perforation (n = 1), constipation (n = 4), sexual dysfunction (n = 2), urinary urgency (n = 3) and retention of urine (n = 4). There was no mortality in both the groups. During a mean follow-up of 5.2 years, recurrent ERP was noted in one patient and partial mucosal prolapse was seen in three patients. Conclusion: LPMR/LRR is a safe and effective treatment for ERP in men with very low recurrence rates. Randomised trials comparing modified LPMR with LVMR are needed to establish the better procedure in males.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Ganapathi SK
    -  Subbiah R
    -  Rudramurthy S
    -  Kakkilaya H
    -  Ramakrishnan P
    -  Chinnusamy P
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed192    
    PDF Downloaded7    

Recommend this journal

2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04