Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41931157›Full record

ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2026

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).

F A Gultekin, B Balcı, Y Yıldırım, Ç Arslan, N F Yaşar, T Bisgin, A Bayraktar, S Zenger, N Şengül, M Çakır and 6 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Laparoscopic resection-rectopexy with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE): In a male with recurrent internal rectal prolapse-A video vignette.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026
    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

16 authors.

F A GultekinGeneral Surgery Department, Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University, School of Medicine, Zonguldak, Turkey. aycafgultekin@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4148-5871
B BalcıGeneral Surgery Department, ASV Yasam Hospital, Antalya, Turkey.
Y YıldırımGeneral Surgery Department, Florence Nightingale Hospital, Demiroglu Bilim University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ç ArslanGeneral Surgery Department, Istanbul Health and Technology University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
N F YaşarGeneral Surgery Department, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, School of Medicine, Eskisehir, Turkey.
T BisginGeneral Surgery Department, Dokuz Eylul University, School of Medicine, Izmir, Turkey.
A BayraktarGeneral Surgery Department, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
S ZengerGeneral Surgery Department, VKV American Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
N ŞengülGeneral Surgery Department, Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University, School of Medicine, Bolu, Turkey.
M ÇakırGeneral Surgery Department, Necmettin Erbakan University, School of Medicine, Konya, Turkey.
O BozbıyıkGeneral Surgery Department, Ege University, School of Medicine, Izmir, Turkey.
R KozanGeneral Surgery Department, Gazi University, School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.
F Y KarakayalıGeneral Surgery Department, Baskent University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
A E CandaPrivate Clinic for Colorectal Surgery and Peritoneal Surface Malignancies, Izmir, Turkey.
E ÖztürkGeneral Surgery Department, Medicana Hospital, Bursa, Turkey.
T BulutGeneral Surgery Department, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe indications and outcomes of ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR) in the treatment of rectal prolapse in males have been minimally addressed in the literature. This study aimed to evaluate the demographics, clinical characteristics, and surgical outcomes associated with VMR in male patients.

methodsThis nationwide retrospective cohort study included male patients who underwent VMR at centers performing pelvic floor surgery across Turkey. Clinical and surgical characteristics were obtained, and functional outcomes were evaluated using Cleveland Clinic Incontinence score (CCIS) and Altomare Obstructed Defecation Syndrome (ODS) scores at the pre- and postoperative periods.

resultsForty-one male patients (mean age, 45.4 years; mean BMI, 25.6 kg/m

conclusionsIn this nationwide retrospective cohort study, VMR was associated with favorable functional outcomes in males. Recurrence rates were significantly higher in those with internal rectal prolapse. As sexual function was not systematically assessed, prospective studies with standardized patient-reported outcomes are warranted.

Indexed as

Rectal ProlapseRectumSurgical MeshAdultAgedColorectal Surgical ProceduresFecal IncontinenceHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedPelvic FloorPostoperative ComplicationsRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeExternal rectal prolapseFecal incontinenceInternal rectal prolapseMale sexObstructive defecation syndromeVentral mesh rectopexy

Identifiers

PMID41931157
PMCPMC13056734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.