Cargando…

Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare patients’ mid-term functional and quality of life (QoL) outcomes following robotic ventral mesh rectopexy (RVMR) and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR). METHODS: The data of consecutive female patients who underwent minimally invasive ventral...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Laitakari, K. E., Mäkelä-Kaikkonen, J. K., Kössi, J., Kairaluoma, M., Koivurova, S., Pollari, L., Ohtonen, P., Rautio, T. T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8917003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34935090
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02563-z
_version_ 1784668444924313600
author Laitakari, K. E.
Mäkelä-Kaikkonen, J. K.
Kössi, J.
Kairaluoma, M.
Koivurova, S.
Pollari, L.
Ohtonen, P.
Rautio, T. T.
author_facet Laitakari, K. E.
Mäkelä-Kaikkonen, J. K.
Kössi, J.
Kairaluoma, M.
Koivurova, S.
Pollari, L.
Ohtonen, P.
Rautio, T. T.
author_sort Laitakari, K. E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare patients’ mid-term functional and quality of life (QoL) outcomes following robotic ventral mesh rectopexy (RVMR) and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR). METHODS: The data of consecutive female patients who underwent minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy for external or symptomatic internal rectal prolapse at 3 hospitals in Finland between January 2011 and December 2016 were retrospectively collected. Patients were matched by age and diagnosis at a 1:1 ratio. A disease-related symptom questionnaire was sent to all living patients at follow-up in July 2018. RESULTS: After a total of 401 patients (RVMR, n = 187; LVMR, n = 214) were matched, 152 patients in each group were included in the final analyses. The median follow-up times were 3.3 (range 1.6–7.4) years and 3.0 (range 1.6–7.6) years for the RVMR and LVMR groups, respectively. The postoperative QoL measures did not differ between the groups. Compared with the LVMR group, the RVMR group had lower postoperative Wexner Incontinence Score (median 5 vs. median 8; p < 0.001), experienced significant ongoing incontinence symptoms less often (30.6% vs. 49.0%; p < 0.001) and reported less postoperative faecal incontinence discomfort evaluated with the visual analogue scale (median 11 vs. median 39; p = 0.005). RVMR patients had a shorter hospital stay (2.2 days vs. 3.8 days; p < 0.001) but experienced more frequent de novo pelvic pain (31.8% vs. 11.8%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: RVMR and LVMR patients had equal functional and QoL outcomes. Those who underwent RVMR had lower mid-term anal incontinence symptom scores but suffered more frequent de novo pelvic pain. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10151-021-02563-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8917003
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89170032022-03-17 Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses Laitakari, K. E. Mäkelä-Kaikkonen, J. K. Kössi, J. Kairaluoma, M. Koivurova, S. Pollari, L. Ohtonen, P. Rautio, T. T. Tech Coloproctol Original Article BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare patients’ mid-term functional and quality of life (QoL) outcomes following robotic ventral mesh rectopexy (RVMR) and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR). METHODS: The data of consecutive female patients who underwent minimally invasive ventral mesh rectopexy for external or symptomatic internal rectal prolapse at 3 hospitals in Finland between January 2011 and December 2016 were retrospectively collected. Patients were matched by age and diagnosis at a 1:1 ratio. A disease-related symptom questionnaire was sent to all living patients at follow-up in July 2018. RESULTS: After a total of 401 patients (RVMR, n = 187; LVMR, n = 214) were matched, 152 patients in each group were included in the final analyses. The median follow-up times were 3.3 (range 1.6–7.4) years and 3.0 (range 1.6–7.6) years for the RVMR and LVMR groups, respectively. The postoperative QoL measures did not differ between the groups. Compared with the LVMR group, the RVMR group had lower postoperative Wexner Incontinence Score (median 5 vs. median 8; p < 0.001), experienced significant ongoing incontinence symptoms less often (30.6% vs. 49.0%; p < 0.001) and reported less postoperative faecal incontinence discomfort evaluated with the visual analogue scale (median 11 vs. median 39; p = 0.005). RVMR patients had a shorter hospital stay (2.2 days vs. 3.8 days; p < 0.001) but experienced more frequent de novo pelvic pain (31.8% vs. 11.8%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: RVMR and LVMR patients had equal functional and QoL outcomes. Those who underwent RVMR had lower mid-term anal incontinence symptom scores but suffered more frequent de novo pelvic pain. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10151-021-02563-z. Springer International Publishing 2021-12-21 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8917003/ /pubmed/34935090 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02563-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Laitakari, K. E.
Mäkelä-Kaikkonen, J. K.
Kössi, J.
Kairaluoma, M.
Koivurova, S.
Pollari, L.
Ohtonen, P.
Rautio, T. T.
Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses
title Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses
title_full Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses
title_fullStr Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses
title_full_unstemmed Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses
title_short Mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses
title_sort mid-term functional and quality of life outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: multicenter comparative matched-pair analyses
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8917003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34935090
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10151-021-02563-z
work_keys_str_mv AT laitakarike midtermfunctionalandqualityoflifeoutcomesofroboticandlaparoscopicventralmeshrectopexymulticentercomparativematchedpairanalyses
AT makelakaikkonenjk midtermfunctionalandqualityoflifeoutcomesofroboticandlaparoscopicventralmeshrectopexymulticentercomparativematchedpairanalyses
AT kossij midtermfunctionalandqualityoflifeoutcomesofroboticandlaparoscopicventralmeshrectopexymulticentercomparativematchedpairanalyses
AT kairaluomam midtermfunctionalandqualityoflifeoutcomesofroboticandlaparoscopicventralmeshrectopexymulticentercomparativematchedpairanalyses
AT koivurovas midtermfunctionalandqualityoflifeoutcomesofroboticandlaparoscopicventralmeshrectopexymulticentercomparativematchedpairanalyses
AT pollaril midtermfunctionalandqualityoflifeoutcomesofroboticandlaparoscopicventralmeshrectopexymulticentercomparativematchedpairanalyses
AT ohtonenp midtermfunctionalandqualityoflifeoutcomesofroboticandlaparoscopicventralmeshrectopexymulticentercomparativematchedpairanalyses
AT rautiott midtermfunctionalandqualityoflifeoutcomesofroboticandlaparoscopicventralmeshrectopexymulticentercomparativematchedpairanalyses