Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41040126›Full record

ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2025

History of the Treatment of Rectal Prolapse.

Rebecca Spivak, Katherine Hu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Rebecca SpivakDrexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Katherine HuDepartment of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rectal prolapse is the intussusception of the rectum, resulting in its full-thickness protrusion out of the anus. Approximately 0.5% of the general population is affected by this condition, with a higher occurrence in women and the elderly. While benign, rectal prolapse can be debilitating, as it can cause pain, bleeding, mucus discharge, and fecal incontinence. The earliest documented records of rectal prolapse date back to Ancient Egypt (1500-1200 BC), describing laxatives and topical therapeutics for the treatment of an anus turned inside out. Many techniques were devised to hold the reduced prolapsed rectum in place, ranging from cords to the use of bandages. Surgical cauterization of the anal sphincter to prevent recurrent prolapse began as early as 6 BC in India, a practice that continued into the 1800s. Advances in fundamental understanding of the anatomy of the colon, rectum, and anus in the 19th and early 20th centuries paved the way for modern surgical approaches. The 20th century saw the development of procedures proposed by surgeons such as Delorme, Moschowitz, Ripstein, and Altemeier. The emergence of the laparoscopic rectopexy in 1992 and subsequent use of robotic-assisted techniques in the early 2000s marked the transition to modern rectal prolapse surgeries, improving both precision and outcomes. The overall management of rectal prolapse has evolved significantly from ancient remedies to the surgeries known today, yet some fundamental similarities remain consistent between today's outlook and what was documented centuries ago. Understanding the historical evolution of the diagnosis and treatment of rectal prolapse provides insight into the contemporary management of the disorder.

Indexed as

history of surgeryrectal prolapserectopexysuture rectopexyventral mesh rectopexy

Identifiers

PMID41040126
PMCPMC12488234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.