1. Reduced port laparoscopic rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse.
- Author
-
Kusunoki C, Uemura M, Osaki M, Nagae A, Tokuyama S, Kawai K, Takahashi Y, Miyake M, Miyazaki M, Ikeda M, and Kato T
- Subjects
- Humans, Female, Middle Aged, Male, Retrospective Studies, Aged, Treatment Outcome, Surgical Mesh, Feasibility Studies, Operative Time, Adult, Length of Stay statistics & numerical data, Postoperative Complications epidemiology, Postoperative Complications etiology, Rectal Prolapse surgery, Laparoscopy methods
- Abstract
Background: Laparoscopic rectopexy is an established treatment option for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Recently, reduced port surgery (RPS) has emerged as a novel concept, offering reduced postoperative pain and improved cosmetic outcomes compared with conventional multiport surgery (MPS). This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of RPS for full-thickness rectal prolapse., Methods: From October 2012 to December 2018, 37 patients (MPS: 10 cases, RPS: 27 cases) underwent laparoscopic rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Laparoscopic posterior mesh rectopexy (Wells procedure) is the standard technique for full-thickness rectal prolapse at our hospital. RPS was performed using a multi-channel access device, with an additional 12-mm right-hand port. Short-term outcomes were retrospectively compared between MPS and RPS., Results: No significant differences were observed between MPS and RPS in the median operative time, the median blood loss volume, the postoperative complication rates, and median hospital stay duration after surgery., Conclusion: Reduced port laparoscopic posterior mesh rectopexy may serve as an effective therapeutic option for full-thickness rectal prolapse. However, to establish the superiority of RPS over MPS, a prospective, randomized, controlled trial is warranted., (© 2024. The Author(s).)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF