1. Mesh Rectopexy or Resection Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse; Is There a Gold Standard Method: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.
- Author
-
Koimtzis G, Stefanopoulos L, Geropoulos G, Chalklin CG, Karniadakis I, Alawad AA, Alexandrou V, Tteralli N, Carrington-Windo E, Papacharalampous A, and Psarras K
- Abstract
(1) Background: Rectal prolapse is a benign condition that mainly affects females and the elderly. The most common symptoms are constipation and incontinence. The treatment of choice is surgical, but so far, there has been no gold standard method. The aim of this study is to compare the two most common intrabdominal procedures utilized for treating rectal prolapse: the resection rectopexy and the mesh rectopexy. (2) Methods: In this study, we conducted a thorough systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature and compared the two different approaches regarding their complication rate, recurrence rate, and improvement of symptoms rate. (3) Results: No statistically significant difference between the two methods was found regarding the operating time, the length of stay, the overall complication rate, the surgical site infection rate, the cardiopulmonary complication rate, the improvement in constipation and incontinence rates, and the recurrence rate. (4) Conclusions: Our study revealed that mesh rectopexy and resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse have similar short- and long-term outcomes. As a result, the decision for the procedure used should be individualized and based on the surgeon's preference and expertise.
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF