Techniques in coloproctology · 2025
Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse: the PEXITY study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Barra M, Trilling B, Mastronicola G, Sage P-Y, Roudier A, Foote A, Tidadini F, Fournier J, Faucheron J-L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) has gained increasing acceptance for the treatment of patients with a full-thickness rectal prolapse (RP), but literature on follow-up of at least 10 years is scarce. We studied recurrence rate, long-term functional results and quality of life in patients who had LVR for RP more than 12 years ago.
METHOD: The study population consisted of patients who could be contacted among the 175 who had undergone LVR for RP and whose short- and medium-term outcomes were published in 2012. We studied the long-term recurrence rate (Kaplan-Meier), functional outcome (Wexner and ODS scores), quality of life (EuroQol) and satisfaction of the patient through clinical examination(s), specific scores and questionnaires.
RESULTS: Of the 175 patients, 14 patients had exclusion criteria, 57 had died, and 42 were lost to follow-up, leaving 62 patients for analysis. Seventeen patients presented with a recurrence (10.5%) at the 10-year follow-up. The only statistically significant risk factor for recurrence was recurrent RP (HR = 11.5 (2.54-52.2), P = 0.002). The median faecal incontinence score was 4 (0-10) and significantly worse in patients who had a recurrence [12 (7-13) vs 3 (0-9); P = 0.016]. The median obstructive defaecation score was 6 (3-12). The median quality of life score was 7 (6-8). Most patients who presented with a recurrence said they would undergo the operation again and recommended it, as would patients with no recurrence.
CONCLUSION: LVR for RP is a safe and efficient technique with sustainable long-term results that shows long-term efficacy at > 10 years after the operation.
METHOD: The study population consisted of patients who could be contacted among the 175 who had undergone LVR for RP and whose short- and medium-term outcomes were published in 2012. We studied the long-term recurrence rate (Kaplan-Meier), functional outcome (Wexner and ODS scores), quality of life (EuroQol) and satisfaction of the patient through clinical examination(s), specific scores and questionnaires.
RESULTS: Of the 175 patients, 14 patients had exclusion criteria, 57 had died, and 42 were lost to follow-up, leaving 62 patients for analysis. Seventeen patients presented with a recurrence (10.5%) at the 10-year follow-up. The only statistically significant risk factor for recurrence was recurrent RP (HR = 11.5 (2.54-52.2), P = 0.002). The median faecal incontinence score was 4 (0-10) and significantly worse in patients who had a recurrence [12 (7-13) vs 3 (0-9); P = 0.016]. The median obstructive defaecation score was 6 (3-12). The median quality of life score was 7 (6-8). Most patients who presented with a recurrence said they would undergo the operation again and recommended it, as would patients with no recurrence.
CONCLUSION: LVR for RP is a safe and efficient technique with sustainable long-term results that shows long-term efficacy at > 10 years after the operation.