Cargando…

Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – An Indian perspective

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) has gained widespread acceptance for the management of complete rectal prolapse (CRP). However, there have been concerns considering its use in patients with a redundant sigmoid colon. This study was conducted to evaluate the anatomical and fu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chandra, Abhijit, Singh, Prabhu, Kumar, Saket, Chopra, Nikhil, Gupta, Vishal, Joshi, Pradeep, Gupta, Vivek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6130185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29582793
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_106_17
_version_ 1783353892732403712
author Chandra, Abhijit
Singh, Prabhu
Kumar, Saket
Chopra, Nikhil
Gupta, Vishal
Joshi, Pradeep
Gupta, Vivek
author_facet Chandra, Abhijit
Singh, Prabhu
Kumar, Saket
Chopra, Nikhil
Gupta, Vishal
Joshi, Pradeep
Gupta, Vivek
author_sort Chandra, Abhijit
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) has gained widespread acceptance for the management of complete rectal prolapse (CRP). However, there have been concerns considering its use in patients with a redundant sigmoid colon. This study was conducted to evaluate the anatomical and functional results following LVMR, particularly in cases of CRP with a redundant sigmoid colon. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 25 patients who underwent LVMR from January 2011 to September 2016 was performed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the duration of follow-up. Group A (long-term) with follow-up >3 years and Group B (mid-term) <3 years. RESULTS: The study included 25 patients (M:F = 1.5:1) with a median age of 38 years. Eighty-eight percent of the patients had a redundant sigmoid colon. Significant improvement in post-operative Wexner score as compared to pre-operative values was seen in patients with pre-existing constipation (P < 0.0001). In patients presenting with faecal incontinence (FI), significant improvement in post-operative St. Mark's incontinence score was observed. Functional outcomes remain consistent in long-term follow-up (>3 years). CONCLUSIONS: LVMR seems to be a feasible surgical procedure with minimum morbidity and good long-term functional outcomes. It provides satisfactory results in patients with redundant sigmoid colon and improves pre-existing constipation and FI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6130185
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61301852018-10-01 Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – An Indian perspective Chandra, Abhijit Singh, Prabhu Kumar, Saket Chopra, Nikhil Gupta, Vishal Joshi, Pradeep Gupta, Vivek J Minim Access Surg Original Article INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) has gained widespread acceptance for the management of complete rectal prolapse (CRP). However, there have been concerns considering its use in patients with a redundant sigmoid colon. This study was conducted to evaluate the anatomical and functional results following LVMR, particularly in cases of CRP with a redundant sigmoid colon. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 25 patients who underwent LVMR from January 2011 to September 2016 was performed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the duration of follow-up. Group A (long-term) with follow-up >3 years and Group B (mid-term) <3 years. RESULTS: The study included 25 patients (M:F = 1.5:1) with a median age of 38 years. Eighty-eight percent of the patients had a redundant sigmoid colon. Significant improvement in post-operative Wexner score as compared to pre-operative values was seen in patients with pre-existing constipation (P < 0.0001). In patients presenting with faecal incontinence (FI), significant improvement in post-operative St. Mark's incontinence score was observed. Functional outcomes remain consistent in long-term follow-up (>3 years). CONCLUSIONS: LVMR seems to be a feasible surgical procedure with minimum morbidity and good long-term functional outcomes. It provides satisfactory results in patients with redundant sigmoid colon and improves pre-existing constipation and FI. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6130185/ /pubmed/29582793 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_106_17 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Chandra, Abhijit
Singh, Prabhu
Kumar, Saket
Chopra, Nikhil
Gupta, Vishal
Joshi, Pradeep
Gupta, Vivek
Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – An Indian perspective
title Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – An Indian perspective
title_full Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – An Indian perspective
title_fullStr Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – An Indian perspective
title_full_unstemmed Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – An Indian perspective
title_short Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: A viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – An Indian perspective
title_sort laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: a viable option in procidentia with redundant sigmoid – an indian perspective
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6130185/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29582793
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_106_17
work_keys_str_mv AT chandraabhijit laparoscopicventralrectopexyaviableoptioninprocidentiawithredundantsigmoidanindianperspective
AT singhprabhu laparoscopicventralrectopexyaviableoptioninprocidentiawithredundantsigmoidanindianperspective
AT kumarsaket laparoscopicventralrectopexyaviableoptioninprocidentiawithredundantsigmoidanindianperspective
AT chopranikhil laparoscopicventralrectopexyaviableoptioninprocidentiawithredundantsigmoidanindianperspective
AT guptavishal laparoscopicventralrectopexyaviableoptioninprocidentiawithredundantsigmoidanindianperspective
AT joshipradeep laparoscopicventralrectopexyaviableoptioninprocidentiawithredundantsigmoidanindianperspective
AT guptavivek laparoscopicventralrectopexyaviableoptioninprocidentiawithredundantsigmoidanindianperspective