ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2025
Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse: the PEXITY study.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Pelvic floor reconstruction-An interdisciplinary overview].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Recurrence After Rectopexy: Insights From Magnetic Resonance Defecography.Diseases of the colon and rectum · 2026Article
- Mesh rectopexy in rectal prolapse: toward consensus or continued controversy?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
- Minimally invasive resection rectopexy as a treatment method for obstructive defecation (ODS): functional outcome in ODS; constipation and fecal incontinence.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Beyond stapled transanal rectal resectionWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2026Review
- Robotic Rectopexy: A Single-Centre Experience.Cureus · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) has gained increasing acceptance for the treatment of patients with a full-thickness rectal prolapse (RP), but literature on follow-up of at least 10 years is scarce. We studied recurrence rate, long-term functional results and quality of life in patients who had LVR for RP more than 12 years ago.
methodThe study population consisted of patients who could be contacted among the 175 who had undergone LVR for RP and whose short- and medium-term outcomes were published in 2012. We studied the long-term recurrence rate (Kaplan-Meier), functional outcome (Wexner and ODS scores), quality of life (EuroQol) and satisfaction of the patient through clinical examination(s), specific scores and questionnaires.
resultsOf the 175 patients, 14 patients had exclusion criteria, 57 had died, and 42 were lost to follow-up, leaving 62 patients for analysis. Seventeen patients presented with a recurrence (10.5%) at the 10-year follow-up. The only statistically significant risk factor for recurrence was recurrent RP (HR = 11.5 (2.54-52.2), P = 0.002). The median faecal incontinence score was 4 (0-10) and significantly worse in patients who had a recurrence [12 (7-13) vs 3 (0-9); P = 0.016]. The median obstructive defaecation score was 6 (3-12). The median quality of life score was 7 (6-8). Most patients who presented with a recurrence said they would undergo the operation again and recommended it, as would patients with no recurrence.
conclusionLVR for RP is a safe and efficient technique with sustainable long-term results that shows long-term efficacy at > 10 years after the operation.
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.