Clinical and manometric evaluation of anal sphincter function in patients with rectal prolapse

Hiltunen, Kari-Matti; Matikainen, M; Auvinen, O; Hietanen, Pentti

doi:10.1016/0002-9610(86)90110-8

Cited by 61 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Preoperative incontinence was found to be less frequent and less severe in younger patients with supposedly earlier rectal prolapse. Such findings corroborate the inverse correlation between continence and duration of the prolapse history, which has been hypothesized by Hiltunen et al 19 Evaluation of constipation proved to be difficult, and, as others have, 20 we had to resort mainly to subjective data for comparative assessment of preoperative and postoperative constipation. In addition, the present study may be biased by the retrospective evaluation of preoperative functional status based on medical records.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Functional Results After the Orr-Loygue Transabdominal Rectopexy for Complete Rectal Prolapse

Douard¹,

Frileux²,

Brunel³

et al. 2003

Diseases of the Colon &Amp; Rectum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Functional Results After the Orr-Loygue Transabdominal Rectopexy for Complete Rectal Prolapse

Douard¹,

Frileux²,

Brunel³

et al. 2003

Diseases of the Colon &Amp; Rectum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many of the tools used in the clinical setting rely on recall of FI symptoms such as frequency, type and/or consistency of leakage; some add a rating of the strength of the anal sphincters while others include lifestyle alterations. 6 A few use simple categories such as the outcome (e.g., continent, partially continent, totally incontinent) 7 while others calculate a numerical score using several variables. The Continence Grading Scale of Jorge and Wexner, 8 for example, calculates a score based on recall of 4 levels of frequency (never to always) of solid or liquid stool, gas, wearing a pad and lifestyle alteration.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Recall and Daily Self-Report of Fecal Incontinence Severity

Fisher

Savik

2008

Journal of Wound, Ostomy &Amp; Continence Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[5] Patients with complete rectal prolapse have markedly impaired rectal adaptation to distention, which may contribute to anal incontinence, and consequently more than half of the patients with rectal prolapse have coexisting incontinence. [678910] Constipation is associated with prolapse in 15-65% of patients. [9] The aim of treatment is to control the prolapse, restore continence and prevent constipation or impaired evacuation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A single centre comparative study of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy versus suture rectopexy

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM:The aim of our study is to compare the results of laparoscopic mesh vs. suture rectopexy.MATERIALS AND METHODS:In this retrospective study, 70 patients including both male and female of age ranging between 20 years and 65 years (mean 42.5 yrs) were subjected to laparoscopic rectopexy during the period between March 2007 and June 2012, of which 38 patients underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy and 32 patients laparoscopic suture rectopexy. These patients were followed up for a mean period of 12 months assessing first bowel movement, hospital stay, duration of surgery, faecal incontinence, constipation, recurrence and morbidity.RESULTS:Duration of surgery was 100.8 ± 12.4 minutes in laparoscopic suture rectopexy and 120 ± 10.8 min in laparoscopic mesh rectopexy. Postoperatively, the mean time for the first bowel movement was 38 hrs and 40 hrs, respectively, for suture and mesh rectopexy. Mean hospital stay was five (range: 4-7) days. There was no significant postoperative complication except for one port site infection in mesh rectopexy group. Patients who had varying degree of incontinence preoperatively showed improvement after surgery. Eleven out of 18 (61.1%) patients who underwent laparoscopic suture rectopexy as compared to nine of 19 (47.3%) patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy improved as regards constipation after surgery.CONCLUSION:There were no significant difference in both groups who underwent surgery except for patients undergoing suture rectopexy had better symptomatic improvement of continence and constipation. Also, cost of mesh used in laparoscopic mesh rectopexy is absent in lap suture rectopexy group. To conclude that laparoscopic suture rectopexy is a safe and feasible procedure and have comparable results as regards operative time, morbidity, bowel function, cost and recurrence or even slightly better results than mesh rectopexy.

show abstract

Clinical and manometric evaluation of anal sphincter function in patients with rectal prolapse

Cited by 61 publications

References 10 publications

Functional Results After the Orr-Loygue Transabdominal Rectopexy for Complete Rectal Prolapse

Functional Results After the Orr-Loygue Transabdominal Rectopexy for Complete Rectal Prolapse

Comparison of Recall and Daily Self-Report of Fecal Incontinence Severity

A single centre comparative study of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy versus suture rectopexy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About