ArticleDiseases of the colon and rectum2025
Ventral Rectopexy: An International Expert Panel Consensus and Review of Contemporary Literature.
Article in Diseases of the colon and rectum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety of non-absorbable tack fixation in laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external and high-grade internal rectal prolapse: early outcomes from a single-centre cohort.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Focused analysis of the surgical management for recurrence of internal rectal prolapse and obstructed defecation syndrome after stapled rectal resection procedures: a long-term single-center experience.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- Mesh rectopexy in rectal prolapse: toward consensus or continued controversy?Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Disclosure of mesh origin in rectopexy: an under-recognized component of informed consent.International journal of colorectal disease · 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
- Use of barbed suture in surgery and the risk of intestinal obstruction: analysis of a large institutional cohort.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Rectal prolapse: tailoring operative strategy to pathophysiology.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
- Surgeon preferences and practice patterns in rectopexy: Results of an international survey.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Article
- Mesh in rectopexy: biological, synthetic, or hybrid?Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Techniques in coloproctology - controversies in coloproctology resection: rectopexy is an underutilised procedure in the management of both symptomatic high-grade internal and external rectal prolapse.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- Comparative clinical outcomes of ventral rectopexy versus STARR in the management of obstructed defecation syndrome: a clinical review.Updates in surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVentral rectopexy has become increasingly used in the surgical management of rectal prolapse. There is a need for a contemporary evaluation of the role of the procedure and a description of its use in clinical practice.
objectiveTo create an international consensus on ventral rectopexy.
designAn expert panel undertook a scoping review of the literature to identify subject domains of interest. Literature reviews were completed for each domain with subsequent development of evidence-based and practice-based statements. These statements were compiled and reviewed by the group over a total of 9 meetings. Once statements were confirmed, supportive text was finalized, and an anonymous vote was completed using Research Electronic Data Capture to record consensus.
settingAn international expert panel comprising colorectal surgeons who perform ventral rectopexy in a high-volume center.
main outcome measuresStatements and associated expert consensus.
resultsEleven experts identified 10 domains for review: indications, contraindications, assessment and planning, consent, operative details, prostheses, complications, follow-up, recurrence and reoperative surgery, and specific considerations. After round table review, there were 17 resultant statements for consideration. Experts agreed unanimously with 13 of the statements and their accompanying text, with different experts disagreeing regarding the remaining 4 statements (91% consensus each). LIMITATIONS: Paucity of high-quality data.
conclusionsThis international group developed 17 statements with high consensus. These statements provide an up-to-date summary of the literature, identify key areas for research development, and provide a reference point for colon and rectal surgeons who undertake ventral rectopexy as part of their practice. See Video Abstract . RECTOPEXIA VENTRAL CONSENSO DE UN PANEL INTERNACIONAL DE EXPERTOS Y REVISIN DE LA LITERATURA CONTEMPORNEA: ANTECEDENTES:La rectopexia ventral se ha utilizado cada vez más en el tratamiento quirúrgico del prolapso rectal. Es necesario realizar una evaluación contemporánea del rol del procedimiento y una descripción de su uso en la práctica clínica.OBJETIVO:Crear un consenso internacional sobre la rectopexia ventral.DISEÑO:Un panel de expertos realizó una revisión exhaustiva de la literatura para identificar los dominios temáticos de interés. Se completaron revisiones de la literatura para cada dominio con el desarrollo de declaraciones basadas en la evidencia y la práctica. Estas fueron compiladas y revisadas por el grupo a lo largo de un total de nueve reuniones. Una vez que se confirmaron las declaraciones, se finalizó el texto de apoyo y se completó una votación anónima utilizando REDCap para registrar el consenso.ESCENARIO:Un panel internacional de expertos compuesto por cirujanos colorrectales que realizan rectopexia ventral en un centro de alto volumen.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS:Declaraciones y consenso de expertos asociado.RESULTADOS:Once expertos identificaron diez dominios a revisar: indicaciones, contraindicaciones, evaluación y planificación, consentimiento, detalles operatorios, prótesis, complicaciones, seguimiento, recurrencia y cirugía reoperatoria y consideraciones específicas. Después de la revisión en mesa redonda, hubo 17 declaraciones resultantes para su consideración. Los expertos estuvieron de acuerdo unánimemente con trece de las declaraciones y su texto acompañante, y diferentes expertos estuvieron en desacuerdo con cuatro declaraciones (91% de consenso cada una).LIMITACIONES:Escasez de datos de alta calidad.CONCLUSIÓN:Este grupo internacional desarrolló 17 declaraciones con alto consenso. Estas declaraciones proporcionan un resumen actualizado de la literatura, identifican áreas claves para el desarrollo de la investigación y un punto de referencia para los cirujanos de colon y recto que realizan rectopexia ventral como parte de su práctica. (Traducción-Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez ).
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.