ReviewPediatric surgery international2025
Rectal prolapse in adult patients with anorectal malformations: considerations for adult colorectal surgeons.
Review in Pediatric surgery international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRectal prolapse is a known sequela in adults with anorectal malformations (ARMs), presenting unique surgical challenges due to altered pelvic anatomy, prior reconstructions, and compromised bowel function. This study aimed to evaluate the suitability of conventional rectal prolapse repair techniques for this population and to present our institutional outcomes.
methodsA literature review was conducted to identify standard rectal prolapse repair procedures in adults. In addition, a retrospective review of adult ARM patients undergoing prolapse repair between 2018 and 2023 at a single tertiary center was performed. Data collected included demographics, ARM type, prolapse characteristics, surgical procedures, and outcomes.
resultsSeventeen adult ARM patients (59% female, median age 30 years) underwent prolapse repair. The majority (88%) were treated with a modified Altemeier procedure; 12% underwent a modified Delorme procedure. Rectopexy or rectosigmoid resection were avoided due to altered anatomy and risk to continence mechanisms. At a median follow-up of 18 months, two patients (12%) experienced minor recurrence.
conclusionsPerineal resections such as modified Delorme or modified Altemeier procedures are effective and safe for adult ARM patients with rectal prolapse. Surgical strategies must be individualized to accommodate the complex anatomy and functional considerations in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40517363What 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.