BMC Surgery (Sep 2024)

Reduced port laparoscopic rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse

  • Chikako Kusunoki,
  • Mamoru Uemura,
  • Mao Osaki,
  • Ayumi Nagae,
  • Shinji Tokuyama,
  • Kenji Kawai,
  • Yusuke Takahashi,
  • Masakazu Miyake,
  • Michihiko Miyazaki,
  • Masataka Ikeda,
  • Takeshi Kato

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02545-6
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 7

Abstract

Read online

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.

Keywords