ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2017
Abdominal Approaches to Rectal Prolapse.
Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of four surgical approaches for rectal prolapse: multicentre randomized clinical trial.BJS open · 2022Trial
- History of the Treatment of Rectal Prolapse.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2025Review
- Association between body roundness index and constipation using data from NHANES 2005-2010.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparative Outcomes of Transabdominal and Transperineal Approaches for Full-Thickness Rectal Prolapse Repair: A Fourteen-Year Retrospective Study.Gastroenterology research · 2025Article
- Surgical approaches for complete rectal prolapse.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Managing recurrent rectal prolapse in women: a single-center study.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Modified Altemeier Procedure as Management for Incarcerated Rectal Prolapse in a Young Healthy Male Patient: A Case Report and Literature Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Outcomes of Laparoscopic Suture Rectopexy Versus Laparoscopic Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2024Review
- Comparative study of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy versus perineal stapler resection for external full-thickness rectal prolapse in elderly patients: enhanced outcomes and reduced recurrence rates-a retrospective cohort study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Article
- Mesh Rectopexy or Resection Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse; Is There a Gold Standard Method: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Current diagnostic tools and treatment modalities for rectal prolapse.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Review
- Clinical outcomes of surgical management for recurrent rectal prolapse: a multicenter retrospective study.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2022Article
- External rectal prolapse: abdominal or perineal repair for men? A retrospective cohort study.Gastroenterology report · 2022Article
- Article
- Abdominal ventral rectopexy with colectomy for obstructed defecation syndrome: An alternative option for selected patients.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
- Tension-free vaginal mesh operation for concomitant rectal and uterine prolapse: A case report.Urology case reports · 2019Article
- Outcome of a Modified Laparoscopic Suture Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse with the Use of a Single or Double Suture: A Case Series of 15 Patients.The American journal of case reports · 2017Article
- Surgical options for full-thickness rectal prolapse: current status and institutional choice.Annals of gastroenterologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rectal prolapse is a debilitating condition with a complex etiology. Symptoms are most commonly prolapse of the rectum and pain with bowel movements or straining, with worsening fecal incontinence over time due to progressive stretching of the anal sphincters. Physical findings are fairly consistent from patient to patient-most notably diastasis of the levator ani muscles, deep pouch of Douglas, redundant sigmoid colon, a mobile mesorectum, and occasionally a solitary rectal ulcer. Evaluation includes a physical exam or imaging demonstrating the prolapse, and evaluating for other causes of pelvic floor dysfunction. Multiple surgical repairs are available, but treatment must be individualized based on patient symptoms and the presence or absence of constipation or other pelvic floor disorders. Mesh repairs have shown promising results, but carry the added risks of mesh erosion, infection, and mesh migration. The optimal repair has not been clearly demonstrated at this time.
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.