Short‐term results for laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biological mesh for pelvic organ prolapse

Wahed, Shajahan; Ahmad, Mukhtar; Mohiuddin, Kamran; Katory, Mark; Mercer-Jones, Mark

doi:10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02921.x

Cited by 55 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Looking at studies using the same technique, but with biologic instead of synthetic mesh, improvement rates can reach 95 % for constipation and for incontinence, although it must be noted that these results are observed with shortterm follow-up [9,10].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biologic mesh for the treatment of obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse: a critical appraisal of the first 100 cases

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…However, these did show 82-95 % improvement of obstructed defaecation syndrome (ODS) symptoms and 73-95 % improvement of FI [9,10]. The lack of comparative data does not allow us to establish the superiority of any biologic mesh in terms of surgical complications, as well as short-and longer-term functional outcomes [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biologic mesh for the treatment of obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse: a critical appraisal of the first 100 cases

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…the data interpreted within this study, therefore, include patients who have been reported previously by the individual centers. [3][4][5][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] the indication for patients undergoing lVR was at the discretion of individual center practice. however, 4 of the 5 centers included within this study were involved in the creation of a published consensus for lVR with standardized indications for surgery, 18 and, as such, practice was consistent among all of the centers.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multicenter Collaboration to Assess the Safety of Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy

Evans

Stevenson

Sileri

et al. 2015

Diseases of the Colon &Amp; Rectum

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However number of biological meshes used are small and the long-term efficacy of biological materials in pelvic floor repair has yet to be defined [8,9]. The increased cost of the bio prosthetics is also of concern [10][11][12][13]. Long-term evidence and well-powered randomized trials are needed to fully define the roles of the various meshes in ventral mesh rectopexy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy and Sacrocolpopexy for Rectal Prolapse and Obstructed Defecation: Analysis of First 20 Cases at a UK District General Hospital

Tennakoon¹,

Farook²

2016

Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Journal of Surgery IntroductionLaparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) is gaining wider acceptance amongst colorectal surgeons as the technique that can address symptoms of both external and internal rectal prolapse. It also allows correction of any associated rectocele, enterocele and posterior vaginal wall prolapse as well as vault prolapse. The learning curve for LVMR is unknown and there is no consensus on case selection. The aim of this study is to share our results to show that LVMR can be learnt and safely performed by experienced laparoscopic colorectal surgeons in district general hospitals with short term results similar to that of establish centres. MethodologyPrior to start of this retrospective study UK National Health Service Health Research Authority website was consulted and NHS Research Ethics Committee approval was not required. The procedures followed were in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000.Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy was started at our institution in January 2011. All patients presented with obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) and rectal prolapse from January 2011 to January 2015 are included in this analysis. Patients presenting to the out patients department with symptoms of difficulty in evacuation, sense of incomplete evacuation, pelleted stools, frequent visits to the toilet, perineal, vaginal or anal digitation, incontinence and pelvic pain were clinically diagnosed as having obstructed defecation. All with such symptoms were investigated with anorectal physiology, defecation proctography, colon transit studies, colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy as appropriate. Patients with obvious rectal prolapse underwent either colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy as indicated.Fluoroscopic defecography was performed with vaginal, oral and bladder contrast. Defecography, anorectal physiology and symptoms were discussed in the fortnightly pelvic floor MDT which consists of two colorectal surgeons (both authors), one radiologist, the radiographer who performs defecography, one urogynaecologist and the colorectal nurse specialist who performs anorectal physiology and biofeedback. Fluoroscopy films were reviewed by all MDT members and intussusception was graded according to oxford prolapse grade [1] (Grade 1-High recto rectal intussusception, Grade 2-Low recto-rectal intussusception, Grade 3-High recto-anal intussusception, Grade 4-Low recto-anal intussusception, Grade 5-Complete rectal prolapse). Evacuation time, number of attempts at evacuation and speed of opening of the anal canal were considered as subjective global markers of evacuation efficiency. In the case of rectocele barium trapping in the rectocele was considered significant. All patients with ODS then underwent maximal medical therapy as well as biofeedback. Since 2012 patients are offered trans anal irrigation as a form of conservative treatment if they do not respond to maximal medical therapy. Patients with high grade intussusception (Grade 3 and 4) and reduced AbstractIntroduction: ...

show abstract

Short‐term results for laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biological mesh for pelvic organ prolapse

Abstract: In the short term, LVR using biological mesh is safe and as effective as synthetic mesh, with high patient satisfaction. Constipation and faecal incontinence scores were both improved.

Cited by 55 publications

References 19 publications

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biologic mesh for the treatment of obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse: a critical appraisal of the first 100 cases

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy using biologic mesh for the treatment of obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse: a critical appraisal of the first 100 cases

A Multicenter Collaboration to Assess the Safety of Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy

Safety and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy and Sacrocolpopexy for Rectal Prolapse and Obstructed Defecation: Analysis of First 20 Cases at a UK District General Hospital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About