ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2015
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.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Italian Unitary Society of Colon-Proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colonproctologia) guidelines for the management of obstructed and ineffective defecation syndrome.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Guideline
- Could robotic-assisted surgery reduce mesh-related complications after ventral mesh rectopexy? Experience of a tertiary centre and systematic review of the literature.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024Pooled it
- Ventral Prosthesis Rectopexy for obstructed defaecation syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Mesh-related complications and recurrence after ventral mesh rectopexy with synthetic versus biologic mesh: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Pooled it
- Imaging modalities for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with obstructed defaecation syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy in adults with chronic constipation.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Trial
- Anatomical and functional changes to the pelvic floor after robotic versus laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: a randomised study.International urogynecology journal · 2016Trial
- Minimally invasive resection rectopexy as a treatment method for obstructive defecation (ODS): functional outcome in ODS; constipation and fecal incontinence.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Ventral Rectopexy: An International Expert Panel Consensus and Review of Contemporary Literature.Diseases of the colon and rectum · 2025Article
- Robot-assisted mesh rectosacropexy and sigmoid colon resection for obstructive defecation syndrome: a two-stage surgical approach.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Robotic-assisted rectosigmoid resection rectopexy with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE): technical notes, short-term results, and functional outcome.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Long term outcomes of laparoscopic sacro/colpo-hysteropexy with and without rectopexy for the treatment of prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Mesh safety in pelvic surgery: Our experience and outcome of biological mesh used in laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
- Modified Gant procedure for treatment of internal rectal prolapse in elderly women.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
- Anatomo-functional outcomes of the laparoscopic Frykman-Goldberg procedure for rectal prolapse in a tertiary referral centre.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Advantages of robotic surgery in the treatment of complex pelvic organs prolapse.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Abdominal ventral rectopexy with colectomy for obstructed defecation syndrome: An alternative option for selected patients.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
- Clinical efficacy of integral theory-guided laparoscopic integral pelvic floor/ligament repair in the treatment of internal rectal prolapse in females.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) is gaining wider acceptance as the preferred procedure to correct internal as well as external rectal prolapse associated with obstructed defaecation syndrome and/or faecal incontinence. Very few reports exist on the use of biologic mesh for LVR. The aim of our study was to report the complication and recurrence rate of our first 100 cases of LVR for symptomatic internal rectal prolapse and/or rectocele using a porcine dermal collagen mesh.
methodsProspectively collected data on LVR for internal rectal prolapse were analysed. Surgical complications and functional results in terms of faecal incontinence (measured with the Faecal Incontinence Severity Index = FISI) and constipation (measured with the Wexner Constipation Score = WCS) at 3, 6 and 12 months were analysed. It was considered an improvement if FISI or WCS scores were reduced by at least 25 % and a cure if the FISI score decreased to <10 and the WCS decreased to <5.
resultsBetween April 2009 and April 2013, 100 consecutive female patients (mean age 63 years, range 24-88 years) underwent LVR. All patients had internal rectal prolapse (grade III [n = 25] and grade IV [n = 75] according to the Oxford classification) and rectocele. Mean operative time was 85 ± 40 min. Conversion rate to open technique was 1 %. There was no post-operative mortality. Overall 16 patients (16 %) experienced 18 complications, including rectal perforation (n = 1), small bowel obstruction (n = 2), urinary tract infection (n = 8), subcutaneous emphysema (n = 3), wound haematoma (n = 2), long lasting sacral pain (n = 1) and incisional hernia (1). Median post-operative length of stay was 2 days. Ninety-eight out of 100 patients completed follow-up. At the end of follow-up, the mean FISI score improved from 8.4 (±4.0 standard deviation (SD) p = 0.003) to 3.3 ± 2.3 SD (p = 0.04). Incontinence improved in 37 out of 43 patients (86 %), and 31 patients (72 %) were cured. Similarly, the mean WCS score improved from 18.4 ± 11.6 SD to 5.4 ± 4.1 SD (p = 0.04). Constipation improved in 82 out of 89 patients (92 %), and 70 patients (79 %) were cured. No worsening of continence status, constipation or sexual function was observed. Fourteen patients (14 %) experienced persistence or recurrence of prolapse.
conclusionsLVR using biologic mesh is a safe and effective procedure for improving symptoms of obstructed defaecation and faecal incontinence in patients with internal rectal prolapse associated with rectocele.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.