ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2016
New-onset rectoanal intussusception may not result in symptomatic improvement after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-analysis and quality of life after laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for posterior compartment prolapse: a randomized trial.Techniques in coloproctology · 2019Trial
- Factors Predicting the Presence of Concomitant Enterocele and Rectocele in Female Patients With External Rectal Prolapse.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Article
- Midterm functional outcome after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external rectal prolapse.Asian journal of endoscopic surgery · 2020Article
- Surgical Treatment of Rectal Prolapse in the Laparoscopic Era; A Review of the Literature.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2020Review
- High take-off intussusception or prolapse may have a poor outcome after standard ventral mesh rectopexy-a tailored approach is required.Techniques in coloproctology · 2017Article
- New-onset rectoanal intussusceptions after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: a normal image?Techniques in coloproctology · 2016Article
- Current status of laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for external and internal rectal prolapse.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study was designed to assess defecatory function in patients who underwent laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR) for external rectal prolapse (ERP).
methodsThirty-one patients who underwent evacuation proctography 6 months postoperatively were assessed. Preoperative proctography had been performed in 21 patients of these patients. Defecatory function was evaluated using the constipation scoring system (CSS) and fecal incontinence severity index (FISI).
resultsThe findings of postoperative proctography revealed no full-thickness ERP in any patient, although in 10 patients the ERP was replaced by rectoanal intussusception (RAI). Of the 31 patients, 30 presented with fecal incontinence preoperatively. Ten of 30 had new-onset RAI. Six months postoperatively, a reduction of at least 50 % in the FISI score of the patients with new-onset RAI tended to be significantly smaller than in the patients without RAI (6/10 vs. 18/20, p = 0.141). Seventeen patients presented with obstructed defecation preoperatively. Seven of them had new-onset RAI. Six months postoperatively, a reduction of at least 50 % in their CSS score in the patients with new-onset RAI was significantly smaller than in patients without RAI (0/7 vs. 8/10, p = 0.002).
conclusionsEvacuation proctography showed new-onset RAI in some patients with ERP who underwent LVR, which was associated with a lack of symptomatic improvement.
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.