Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparison of Open vs. Laparoscopic Abdominal Rectopexy for Full-Thickness Rectal Prolapse: A Meta-Analysis

  • Original Contribution
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

PURPOSE

Using meta-analytical techniques, this study was designed to compare open and laparoscopic abdominal procedures used to treat full-thickness rectal prolapse in adults.

METHODS

Comparative studies published between 1995 and 2003, cited in the literature of open abdominal rectopexy vs. laparoscopic abdominal rectopexy, were used. The primary end points were recurrence and morbidity, and the secondary end points assessed were operative time and length of hospital stay. A random effect model was used to aggregate the studies reporting these outcomes, and heterogeneity was assessed.

RESULTS

Six studies, consisting of a total of 195 patients (98 open and 97 laparoscopic) were included. Analysis of the data suggested that there is no significant difference in recurrence and morbidity between laparoscopic abdominal rectopexy and open abdominal rectopexy. Length of stay was significantly reduced in the laparoscopic group by 3.5 days (95 percent confidence interval, 3.1–4; P < 0.01), whereas the operative time was significantly longer in this group, by approximately 60 minutes (60.38 minutes; 95 percent confidence interval, 49–71.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic abdominal rectopexy is a safe and feasible procedure, which may compare equally with the open technique with regards to recurrence and morbidity and favorably with length of stay. However large-scale randomized trials, with comparative, sound methodology are still needed to ascertain detailed outcome measures accurately.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Flowers LK. Rectal prolapse. In: E-medicine 2002. Available at: http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/topic496.htm. Accessed September 2004

  2. Senapati A. Rectal prolapse. In: Phillips RK, ed. Colorectal surgery. London: WB Saunders, 2001:251–71

  3. KW Eu F Seow-Choen (1997) ArticleTitleFunctional problems in adult rectal prolapse and controversies in surgical treatment Br J Surg 84 904–11 Occurrence Handle9240128

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. F Stelzner (1994) ArticleTitleEtiology and therapy of rectal prolapse. Experiences with 308 cases 1956-1991 [in German] Chirurg 65 533–45 Occurrence Handle8088209

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. S Karasick CM Spettell (1999) ArticleTitleDefecography: does parity play a role in the development of rectal prolapse? Eur Radiol 9 450–3 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s003300050690 Occurrence Handle10087114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. R Wassef DA Rothenberger SM Goldberg (1986) ArticleTitleRectal prolapse Curr Probl Surg 23 397–451 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0011-3840(86)90011-0 Occurrence Handle3522112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. K Azimuddin IT Khubchandani L Rosen JJ Stasik RD Riether JF Reed Suffix3rd (2001) ArticleTitleRectal prolapse: a search for the “best” operation Am Surg 67 622–7 Occurrence Handle11450773

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. DS Kim CB Tsang WD Wong AC Lowry SM Goldberg RD Madoff (1999) ArticleTitleComplete rectal prolapse: evolution of management and results Dis Colon Rectum 42 460–9 Occurrence Handle10215045

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. T Athanasiou O Aziz P Skapinakis et al. (2003) ArticleTitleLeg wound infection after coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis comparing minimally invasive vs. conventional vein harvesting Ann Thorac Surg 76 2141–6 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0003-4975(03)01435-8 Occurrence Handle14667670

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. T Athanasiou O Aziz O Mangoush et al. (2004) ArticleTitleDo off-pump techniques reduce the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation in elderly patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting? Ann Thorac Surg 77 1567–74 Occurrence Handle10.1016/j.athoracsur.2003.10.040 Occurrence Handle15111144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bachoo P, Brazzelli M, Grant A. Surgery for complete rectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000(2):CD001758

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sterne JA, Egger M, Smith G. Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases. In: Egger M, Smith G, Altman DG, eds. Systematic reviews and healthcare: meta-analysis in context. 2nd ed. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 2001:189–208

  13. M Egger G Davey Smith M Schneider C Minder (1997) ArticleTitleBias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphic test BMJ 315 629–34 Occurrence Handle9310563

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. R DerSimonian N Laird (1986) ArticleTitleMeta-analysis in clinical trials Control Clin Trials 7 177–88 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 Occurrence Handle3802833

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. R Baker AJ Senagore MA Luchtefeld (1995) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic-assisted vs. open resection. Rectopexy offers excellent results Dis Colon Rectum 38 199–201 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF02052451 Occurrence Handle7851177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. P Boccasanta M Venturi MC Reitano et al. (1999) ArticleTitleLaparotomic vs. laparoscopic rectopexy in complete rectal prolapse Dig Surg 16 415–9 Occurrence Handle10.1159/000018758 Occurrence Handle10567804

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. MV Kairaluoma MT Viljakka IH Kellokumpu (2003) ArticleTitleOpen vs. laparoscopic surgery for rectal prolapse: a case-controlled study assessing short-term outcome Dis Colon Rectum 46 353–60 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s10350-004-6555-8 Occurrence Handle12626911

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. MJ Solomon AA Eyers (1996) ArticleTitleLaparoscopic rectopexy using mesh fixation with a spiked chromium staple Dis Colon Rectum 39 279–84 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF02049468 Occurrence Handle8603548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. MJ Solomon CJ Young AA Eyers RA Roberts (2002) ArticleTitleRandomized clinical trial of laparoscopic vs. open abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse Br J Surg 89 35–9 Occurrence Handle10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01957.x Occurrence Handle11851660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. E Xynos E Chrysos J Tsiaoussis E Epanomeritakis JS Vassilakis (1999) ArticleTitleResection rectopexy for rectal prolapse. The laparoscopic approach Surg Endosc 13 862–4 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s004649901120 Occurrence Handle10449839

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. G Salkeld M Bagia M Solomon (2004) ArticleTitleEconomic impact of laparoscopic vs. open abdominal rectopexy Br J Surg 91 1188–91 Occurrence Handle10.1002/bjs.4643 Occurrence Handle15449272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. JP Higgins SG Thompson (2002) ArticleTitleQuantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis Stat Med 21 1539–58 Occurrence Handle10.1002/sim.1186 Occurrence Handle12111919

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. J Lau JP Ioannidis CH Schmid (1998) ArticleTitleSumming up evidence: one answer is not always enough Lancet 351 123–7 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0140-6736(97)08468-7 Occurrence Handle9439507

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. DL Sackett DJ Cook (1993) ArticleTitleCan we learn anything from small trials? Ann N Y Acad Sci 703 25–32 Occurrence Handle8192301

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Flather MD, Farkouh ME, Pogue JM, Yusuf S. Strengths and limitations of meta-analysis: larger studies may be more reliable. Control Clin Trials 1997;18:568–79

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology and Technology, Imperial College, London, St. Mary’s Hospital, London, United Kingdom

    Sanjay Purkayastha M.R.C.S., Paris Tekkis M.D., F.R.C.S., Thanos Athanasiou Ph.D., F.E.C.T.S., Omer Aziz M.R.C.S., Paraskeva Paraskevas Ph.D., F.R.C.S., Paul Ziprin M.D., F.R.C.S. & Ara Darzi M.D., F.R.C.S., K.B.E.

Authors
  1. Sanjay Purkayastha M.R.C.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paris Tekkis M.D., F.R.C.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thanos Athanasiou Ph.D., F.E.C.T.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Omer Aziz M.R.C.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Paraskeva Paraskevas Ph.D., F.R.C.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Paul Ziprin M.D., F.R.C.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ara Darzi M.D., F.R.C.S., K.B.E.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paris Tekkis M.D., F.R.C.S..

About this article

Cite this article

Purkayastha, S., Tekkis, P., Athanasiou, T. et al. A Comparison of Open vs. Laparoscopic Abdominal Rectopexy for Full-Thickness Rectal Prolapse: A Meta-Analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 48, 1930–1940 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-005-0077-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-005-0077-x

Key words

Search

Navigation