MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1007/s10151-024-02919-1

Медицинская библиотека · Techniques in coloproctology · 2024

Comparative study of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy versus perineal stapler resection for external full-thickness rectal prolapse in elderly patients: enhanced outcomes and reduced recurrence rates-a retrospective cohort study.

Habeeb T A A M, Podda M, Chiaretti M, Kechagias A, Lledó J B, Kalmoush Abd-Elfattah, Mustafa Fawzy M, Nassar Mohammed Shaaban, Labib Mohamed Fathy, Teama Sobhy Rezk Ahmed, Elshafey Mohammed Hassan, Elbelkasi Hamdi, Alsaad Mohamed Ibrahim Abo, Sallam Ahmed M, Ashour Hassan, Mansour Mohamed Ibrahim, Mostafa Abdelshafy, Elshahidy Tamer Mohamed, Yehia Ahmed M, Rushdy Tamer, Ramadan Alaaedin, Hamed Abd Elwahab M, Yassin Mahmoud Abdou, Metwalli Abd-Elrahman M

Многоцентровое исследованиеСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

In elderly patients with external full-thickness rectal prolapse (EFTRP), the exact differences in postoperative recurrence and functional outcomes between laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) and perineal stapler resection (PSR) have not yet been investigated.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicenter study on 330 elderly patients divided into LVMR group (n = 250) and PSR (n = 80) from April 2012 to April 2019. Patients were evaluated before and after surgery by Wexner incontinence scale, Altomare constipation scale, and patient satisfaction questionnaire. The primary outcomes were incidence and risk factors for EFTRP recurrence. Secondary outcomes were postoperative incontinence, constipation, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

LVMR was associated with fewer postoperative complications (p < 0.001), lower prolapse recurrence (p < 0.001), lower Wexner incontinence score (p = 0.03), and lower Altomare's score (p = 0.047). Furthermore, LVMR demonstrated a significantly higher surgery-recurrence interval (p < 0.001), incontinence improvement (p = 0.019), and patient satisfaction (p < 0.001) than PSR. Three and 13 patients developed new symptoms in LVMR and PSR, respectively. The predictors for prolapse recurrence were LVMR (associated with 93% risk reduction of recurrence, OR 0.067, 95% CI 0.03-0.347, p = 0.001), symptom duration (prolonged duration was associated with an increased risk of recurrence, OR 1.131, 95% CI 1.036-1.236, p = 0.006), and length of prolapse (increased length was associated with a high recurrence risk (OR = 1.407, 95% CI = 1.197-1.655, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LVMR is safe for EFTRP treatment in elderly patients with low recurrence, and improved postoperative functional outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial.gov (NCT05915936), retrospectively registered on June 14, 2023.

Для цитирования: Habeeb T A A M, Podda M, Chiaretti M, Kechagias A, Lledó J B, Kalmoush Abd-Elfattah, Mustafa Fawzy M, Nassar Mohammed Shaaban, Labib Mohamed Fathy, Teama Sobhy Rezk Ahmed, Elshafey Mohammed Hassan, Elbelkasi Hamdi, Alsaad Mohamed Ibrahim Abo, Sallam Ahmed M, Ashour Hassan, Mansour Mohamed Ibrahim, Mostafa Abdelshafy, Elshahidy Tamer Mohamed, Yehia Ahmed M, Rushdy Tamer, Ramadan Alaaedin, Hamed Abd Elwahab M, Yassin Mahmoud Abdou, Metwalli Abd-Elrahman M. Comparative study of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy versus perineal stapler resection for external full-thickness rectal prolapse in elderly patients: enhanced outcomes and reduced recurrence rates-a retrospective cohort study.. Techniques in coloproctology. 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-024-02919-1.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.