ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2025
Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy with and without transverse perineal support using biological mesh for rectal prolapse and perineal descent: postoperative course and functional outcomes.
Article in Annals of 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.
- Beyond stapled transanal rectal resectionWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLaparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) is effective for the treatment of rectal prolapse. However, descending perineal syndrome may impair the outcomes of LVMR. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and functional outcomes of LVMR performed with and without transverse perineal support (TPS).
methodsThis was a retrospective study of 143 consecutive female patients treated with LVMR with or without TPS between 2018 and 2022. Patients with rectal prolapse and perineal descent who underwent surgery were included. Obstructed defecation syndrome and fecal incontinence were evaluated using the Cleveland Constipation Score (Wexner score) and St. Mark's Incontinence Score, respectively. Perineal descent was defined using defecography. Biological meshes were utilized in all cases.
resultsNo significant differences were recorded between with- and without-TPS groups at baseline. TPS was performed in 110 patients (76.9%). Surgical morbidity was higher in the with-TPS group (12.7% vs. 0%, P=0.047), primarily due to seroma formation. Almost all complications were mild (Clavien-Dindo grades I-II). In both groups, digital aid for defecation (P<0.001), prolonged straining (P=0.004), and hematochezia (P<0.001) nearly disappeared postoperatively, though constipation and laxative/enema use persisted in 22.4%. Fecal incontinence significantly decreased from 43.4% to 11.2% (P<0.001). TPS appears to have a potentially favorable effect in reducing the constipation score. Both constipation and incontinence scores remained low up to 24 months after surgery. Operative time was significantly longer in the LVMR with-TPS group (P<0.001).
conclusionLVMR with TPS appears safe and feasible. TPS may provide better surgical outcomes compared to LVMR alone for patients with symptomatic rectoceles and descending perineum syndrome.
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.