Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42328900›Full record

ArticleDiseases of the colon and rectum2026

Recurrence After Rectopexy: Insights From Magnetic Resonance Defecography.

Rachel E Colbran, Leila Neshatian, Vipul R Sheth, Leora A Cohen-Tigör, Michelle Earley, Brooke H Gurland

Abstract readVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Diseases of the colon and rectum, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Rachel E ColbranDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Leila NeshatianDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.ORCID 0000-0003-4153-5012
Vipul R ShethDepartment of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.ORCID 0000-0001-6130-4276
Leora A Cohen-TigörDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Michelle EarleyDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Brooke H GurlandDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.ORCID 0000-0002-3868-7747

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRectal prolapse recurrence after surgical repair remains a major limitation. Prior research surrounding recurrence risk has yielded inconsistent results and assessed a limited range of factors.

objectiveTo evaluate whether preoperative magnetic resonance defecography, anorectal manometry, or balloon expulsion testing could identify biomarkers associated with rectal prolapse recurrence after rectopexy.

designRetrospective cohort study from a prospectively maintained rectal prolapse registry. SETTINGS: Single tertiary institution analysis. PATIENTS: A total of 155 patients (145 female patients) underwent rectopexy for prolapse between 2017 and 2025.

main outcome measuresClinical, technical, and imaging parameters were compared between patients with and without prolapse recurrence.

resultsAll procedures were performed robotically and included ventral (n = 126; 75%), suture (n = 21; 12.5%), and resection rectopexy (n = 8; 4.8%). The recurrence rate was 10.3% (n = 16) during a median follow-up of 1295 days. On univariable analysis, the only clinical factor associated with recurrence was diabetes mellitus (recurrence 31.3% vs no recurrence 5.8%, p < 0.001). On magnetic resonance defecography (female patients) the presence of a cul-de-sac hernia (recurrence 75% vs no recurrence 42.9%, p = 0.015), enterocele (recurrence 43.8% vs no recurrence 16.7%, p = 0.018), and the mean cross-sectional area of the psoas muscle (recurrence median 12.3 cm2 vs no recurrence median 14.3 cm2, p = 0.04) were significantly associated with recurrence. LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its retrospective nature and would benefit from multicenter collaboration to improve statistical power.

conclusionsThis study is the first to integrate MRI findings with clinical factors in evaluating recurrence risk. Some measures of low muscle mass (sarcopenia), an enterocele or cul-de-sac hernia, and diabetes mellitus may be associated with recurrence. Diabetic control and sarcopenia are potentially modifiable through lifestyle interventions, highlighting opportunities for preoperative optimization. Larger-scale studies are warranted to validate these predictors and guide risk-stratified management. See Video Abstract. RECURRENCIA TRAS LA RECTOPEXIA APORTACIONES DE LA DEFECOGRAFA POR RESONANCIA MAGNTICA: ANTECEDENTES:La recurrencia del prolapso rectal tras la reparación quirúrgica sigue constituyendo una limitación importante. Las investigaciones previas sobre el riesgo de recurrencia han arrojado resultados inconsistentes y han evaluado un rango limitado de factores.OBJETIVO:Evaluar si la defecografía por resonancia magnética preoperatoria, la manometría anorrectal o la prueba de expulsión del balón podrían identificar biomarcadores asociados a la recurrencia del prolapso rectal tras la rectopexia.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohortes retrospectivo a partir de un registro de prolapso rectal mantenido de forma prospectiva.ÁMBITO:Análisis realizado en una única institución de nivel terciario.PACIENTES:Un total de 155 pacientes (145 mujeres) se sometieron a una rectopexia por prolapso entre 2017 y 2025.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se compararon los parámetros clínicos, técnicos y de imagen entre los pacientes con y sin recurrencia del prolapso.RESULTADOS:Todos los procedimientos se realizaron mediante cirugía robótica e incluyeron: rectopexia ventral (n = 126; 75%), con sutura (n = 21; 12,5%) y con resección (n = 8; 4,8%). La tasa de recurrencia fue del 10,3% (n = 16) durante un seguimiento mediano de 1295 días. En el análisis univariante, el único factor clínico asociado a la recurrencia fue la diabetes mellitus (recurrencia: 31,3% frente a no recurrencia: 5,8%; p < 0,001). En la defecografía por RM (en pacientes mujeres), la presencia de una hernia del fondo de saco (recurrencia: 75% frente a no recurrencia: 42,9%; p = 0,015), de un enterocele (recurrencia: 43,8% frente a no recurrencia: 16,7%; p = 0,018) y el área de sección transversal media del músculo psoas se asociaron significativamente con la recurrencia (mediana en casos de recurrencia: 12,3 cm² frente a mediana en casos sin recurrencia: 14,3 cm²; p = 0,04).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio se ve limitado por su naturaleza retrospectiva y se beneficiaría de una colaboración multicéntrica para mejorar su potencia estadística.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio es el primero en integrar los hallazgos de la RM con los factores clínicos para evaluar el riesgo de recurrencia. Algunos indicadores de baja masa muscular (sarcopenia), el enterocele o hernia del fondo de saco, y la diabetes mellitus podrían estar asociados con la recurrencia. El control de la diabetes y la sarcopenia son factores potencialmente modificables mediante intervenciones en el estilo de vida, lo que pone de relieve las oportunidades para la optimización preoperatoria. Se requieren estudios a mayor escala para validar estos predictores y orientar un manejo estratificado según el riesgo. (AI-generated translation).

Indexed as

DefecographyMagnetic Resonance ImagingRectal ProlapseRectumAgedColorectal Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansManometryMiddle AgedRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesAnorectal manometryMRI defecographyRectal prolapseRectopexyRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID42328900
PMCPMC13286114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.