SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2025
Surgical outcomes on health-related quality of life in rectal prolapse: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mesh rectopexy in rectal prolapse: toward consensus or continued controversy?Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRectal prolapse is a serious but not life-threatening condition. It can involve many complications, including quality-of-life changes. Surgical intervention is the standard medical treatment for these patients. In this article, we aim to investigate the quality-of-life outcomes in patients undergoing rectal prolapse surgery, compare different surgical methods, and assess different quality-of-life questionnaires to study these patients. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a systematic literature search on PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Embase. STUDY SELECTION: A total of 4916 studies were screened, resulting in a final 34 included studies, and 20 were included in the meta-analysis.
interventionsData were extracted from studies comparing the quality of life in rectal prolapse patients before and after surgery.
main outcome measuresExcept for one, all included studies reported improved quality-of-life scores. Different instruments were used to examine these patients' quality of life, but SF-36 was implemented most frequently. It comprises eight different domains, and these domains were reported in six different studies.
resultsAll eight domains showed better outcomes after surgery. The final analysis was based on the surgical approach (perineal or abdominal) and showed no statistically significant superiority of any of the approaches. LIMITATIONS: The high heterogeneity of the included studies.
conclusionSurgical intervention can improve the quality of life of rectal prolapse patients. However, there is no consensus on which surgical approach achieves the best outcomes. Different instruments are used to evaluate the quality of life in these patients, but there is no specific questionnaire to assess this.
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.