Danish medical journal · 2026
Minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy.
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.
Ahmed Maria, Perdawood Sharaf Karim
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Rectal prolapse significantly impairs the quality of life, particularly in elderly women. Minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) has emerged as a preferred surgery, offering anatomical correction and improved post-operative outcomes. This study evaluated operative details, complications and recurrence rates following laparoscopic VMR (LVMR) and robotic VMR (RVMR) at a single tertiary care centre over a five-year period.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing LVMR or RVMR between 2019 and 2024 was conducted. The two groups were compared with respect to demographics, intraoperative details, post-operative complications, recurrence and long-term functional outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 88 patients had undergone VMR, of whom 69 underwent RVMR; 19 underwent LVMR. All patients were female with a median age of 74 years. External prolapse was observed in 97.7% of the patients, whereas only 2.3% had internal prolapse. No statistically significant difference was observed between LVMR and RVMR with regard to length of stay or mean operative time. The conversion rate was 0%. Post-operative complications were classified according to Clavien-Dindo (CD); six patients had a CD IIIb, requiring return to surgical theatres. A single patient from the RVMR group had a recurrence after one year.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive VMR is a long-term, effective and safe surgical method for rectal prolapse, with a low recurrence rate, a relatively low complication rate and a significant improvement in functional outcomes.
FUNDING: None.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not relevant.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing LVMR or RVMR between 2019 and 2024 was conducted. The two groups were compared with respect to demographics, intraoperative details, post-operative complications, recurrence and long-term functional outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 88 patients had undergone VMR, of whom 69 underwent RVMR; 19 underwent LVMR. All patients were female with a median age of 74 years. External prolapse was observed in 97.7% of the patients, whereas only 2.3% had internal prolapse. No statistically significant difference was observed between LVMR and RVMR with regard to length of stay or mean operative time. The conversion rate was 0%. Post-operative complications were classified according to Clavien-Dindo (CD); six patients had a CD IIIb, requiring return to surgical theatres. A single patient from the RVMR group had a recurrence after one year.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive VMR is a long-term, effective and safe surgical method for rectal prolapse, with a low recurrence rate, a relatively low complication rate and a significant improvement in functional outcomes.
FUNDING: None.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not relevant.