A single centre comparative study of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy versus suture rectopexy

• Main Authors: Manash Ranjan Sahoo, Anil Kumar Thimmegowda, Manoj S Gowda
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2014-01-01
• Series: Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
• Subjects: Laparoscopy; mesh rectopexy; presacral fascia; rectal prolapse; suture rectopexy
• Online Access: http://www.journalofmas.com/article.asp?issn=0972-9941;year=2014;volume=10;issue=1;spage=18;epage=22;aulast=Sahoo
• ISSN: 0972-9941; 1998-3921

Aim: The aim of our study is to compare the results of laparoscopic mesh vs. suture rectopexy. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 70 patients including both male and female of age ranging between 20 years and 65 years (mean 42.5 yrs) were subjected to laparoscopic rectopexy during the period between March 2007 and June 2012, of which 38 patients underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy and 32 patients laparoscopic suture rectopexy. These patients were followed up for a mean period of 12 months assessing first bowel movement, hospital stay, duration of surgery, faecal incontinence, constipation, recurrence and morbidity. Results: Duration of surgery was 100.8 ± 12.4 minutes in laparoscopic suture rectopexy and 120 ± 10.8 min in laparoscopic mesh rectopexy. Postoperatively, the mean time for the first bowel movement was 38 hrs and 40 hrs, respectively, for suture and mesh rectopexy. Mean hospital stay was five (range: 4-7) days. There was no significant postoperative complication except for one port site infection in mesh rectopexy group. Patients who had varying degree of incontinence preoperatively showed improvement after surgery. Eleven out of 18 (61.1%) patients who underwent laparoscopic suture rectopexy as compared to nine of 19 (47.3%) patients who underwent laparoscopic mesh rectopexy improved as regards constipation after surgery. Conclusion: There were no significant difference in both groups who underwent surgery except for patients undergoing suture rectopexy had better symptomatic improvement of continence and constipation. Also, cost of mesh used in laparoscopic mesh rectopexy is absent in lap suture rectopexy group. To conclude that laparoscopic suture rectopexy is a safe and feasible procedure and have comparable results as regards operative time, morbidity, bowel function, cost and recurrence or even slightly better results than mesh rectopexy.