期刊文献+

Mesh safety in pelvic surgery:Our experience and outcome of biological mesh used in laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy

下载PDF
导出
摘要 BACKGROUND Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy(LVMR)continues to be a popular treatment option for rectal prolapse,obstructive defecation/faecal incontinence and rectoceles.In recent years there have been concerns regarding the safety of mesh placements in the pelvis.AIM To assess the safety of the mesh and the outcome of the procedure.METHODS Eighty-six patients underwent LVMR with Permacol(Biological)mesh from 2012 to 2018 at University Hospital Wishaw.Forty were treated for obstructive defecation secondary to prolapse,rectocele or internal rectal intussusception,38 for mixed symptoms obstructive defecation and incontinence,5 for pain and bleeding secondary to full thickness prolapse and 3 with symptoms of incontinence.Questionnaires for the calculation of Wexner scores for constipation and incontinence were completed by the patients who were followed up in the clinic 12 wk after surgery and again in 6-12 mo.The average review of their notes was 18.3±4.2 mo.RESULTS The median Wexner scores for constipation pre-operatively and post-operatively were 14.5[Interquartile range(IQR):10.5-18.5]and 3(IQR:1-6),respectively,while the median Wexner score for faecal incontinence was 11(IQR:7-15)and 2(IQR:0-5),respectively(P<0.01).There were 4(4.6%)recurrences,2 cases that presented with erosion of a suture through the rectum and one with diskitis.No mesh complications or mortalities were recorded.CONCLUSION LVMR using a Permacol mesh is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of obstructive defecation/faecal incontinence,rectal prolapse,rectoceles and internal rectal prolapse/intussusception.
机构地区 Department of Surgery
出处 《World Journal of Clinical Cases》 SCIE 2022年第3期891-898,共8页 世界临床病例杂志
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献46

  • 1Jones OM, Cunningham C, Lindsey I. The assessment andmanagement of rectal prolapse, rectal intussusception, rectocoele,and enterocoele in adults. BMJ 2011; 342: c7099 [PMID:21285185 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c7099].
  • 2Varma M, Rafferty J, Buie WD. Practice parameters forthe management of rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum2011; 54: 1339-1346 [PMID: 21979176 DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182310f75].
  • 3Abbott D, Atere-Roberts N, Williams A, Oteng-Ntim E, ChappellLC. Obstetric anal sphincter injury. BMJ 2010; 341: c3414 [PMID:20621967 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c3414].
  • 4Tou S, Brown SR, Malik AI, Nelson RL. Surgery for completerectal prolapse in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; (4):CD001758 [PMID: 18843623].
  • 5Jarry J, Peycru T, Shekher M, Faucheron JL. An uncommonsurgical disease. JAMA Surg 2014; 149: 395-396 [PMID: 24577506DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.808].
  • 6Madoff RD, Mellgren A. One hundred years of rectal prolapsesurgery. Dis Colon Rectum 1999; 42: 441-450 [PMID: 10215042DOI: 10.1007/BF02234164].
  • 7Lieberth M, Kondylis LA, Reilly JC, Kondylis PD. The Delormerepair for full-thickness rectal prolapse: a retrospective review.Am J Surg 2009; 197: 418-423 [PMID: 19245926 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.11.012].
  • 8Altemeier WA, Culbertson WR, Schowengerdt C, Hunt J.Nineteen years' experience with the one-stage perineal repair ofrectal prolapse. Ann Surg 1971; 173: 993-1006 [PMID: 5578808DOI: 10.1097/00000658-197106010-00018].
  • 9Schiedeck TH, Schwandner O, Scheele J, Farke S, Bruch HP.Rectal prolapse: which surgical option is appropriate- LangenbecksArch Surg 2005; 390: 8-14 [PMID: 15004753 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-004-0459-x].
  • 10Loygue J, Nordlinger B, Cunci O, Malafosse M, Huguet C, Parc R.Rectopexy to the promontory for the treatment of rectal prolapse.Report of 257 cases. Dis Colon Rectum 1984; 27: 356-359 [PMID:6376001 DOI: 10.1007/BF02552998].

共引文献7

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部