ArticleGastroenterology report2022
External rectal prolapse: abdominal or perineal repair for men? A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Gastroenterology report, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Surgical outcomes on health-related quality of life in rectal prolapse: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of surgical treatment of complete rectal prolapse in male patients.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Pooled it
- Copy-paste surgery: Altemeier procedure in identical twins with rectal prolapse.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Functional and surgical outcomes of ventral mesh rectopexy in male patients with rectal prolapse: a nationwide multicenter retrospective cohort study by the Pelvic Floor Working Group of the Turkish Society of Colon and Rectal Surgery (TSCRS).Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic Resection Rectopexy with Transanal Specimen Extraction for Complete Rectal Prolapse: Retrospective Cohort Study of Functional Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Surgical approaches for complete rectal prolapse.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Rectal Prolapse Surgery: Balancing Effectiveness and Safety in Abdominal and Perineal Approaches.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
- A case report of largest rectal prolapse in the literature successfully treated with Altemeier's procedure.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExternal rectal prolapse is a relatively rare disease, in which male patients account for a minority. The selection of abdominal repair or perineal repair for male patients has rarely been investigated.
methodsFifty-one male patients receiving abdominal repair (laparoscopic ventral rectopexy) or perineal repair (Delorme or Altemeier procedures) at the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Guangzhou, China) between March 2013 and September 2019 were retrospectively analysed. We compared the recurrence, complication rate, post-operative defecation disorder, length of stay, and quality of life between the abdominal and perineal groups.
resultsOf the 51 patients, 45 had a complete follow-up, with a median of 48.5 months (range, 22.8-101.8 months). A total of 35 patients were under age 40 years. The complication rate associated with abdominal repair was less than that associated with perineal repair (0% vs 20.7%,
conclusionsBoth surgical approaches were safe in men. Compared with perineal repair, the complication rate and recurrence rate for abdominal repair were lower. However, perineal repair was better able to correct constipation.
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.