Surgical decision-making for rectal prolapse: one size does not fit all

ABSTRACT

Background

Surgery remains the only known treatment option for rectal prolapse. Although over 100 abdominal and perineal procedures are available, there is no consensus as to which intervention is best suited for an individual. This retrospective cohort study describes the patient- and disease-related factors involved in making surgical recommendations around rectal prolapse in a single surgeon experience.

Methods

91 consecutive patients ≥18 years old diagnosed with external and/or high-grade internal rectal prolapse were assessed and were prospectively entered into an IRB approved registry. Information on patient symptoms, comorbidities, exam findings, surgeon judgment, and patient preference was collected. Treatment recommendations (abdominal, perineal, or no operation) were analyzed and compared.

Results

Surgical intervention was recommended to 93% of patients. Of those, 66% were recommended robotic abdominal procedures: 75%, robotic ventral mesh rectopexies; 16%, resection rectopexies; and 9%, suture rectopexies. On univariate analysis, patients with older age, higher ASA scores, presence of cardiopulmonary morbidity, pain as a primary rectal prolapse symptom, rectal prolapse always descended, and surgeon concern for frailty and general anesthesia were associated with recommendations for perineal operations (p < 0.05 for all). However, on multivariate analysis, only age and concern over prolonged anesthesia remained correlated with a recommendation for perineal surgery. Of patients >80 years of age, 15% were recommended an abdominal approach.

Conclusions

With multiple options available for the treatment of rectal prolapse, treatment recommendations remain surgeon-dependent and may be influenced by many factors. In our practice, robotic ventral mesh rectopexy was the most commonly recommended operation and was offered to carefully selected patients of advanced age. Although robotic surgery and ventral mesh rectopexy may not be accessible to all patients and surgeons, this represents a single surgeon’s practice bias. This study reinforces the importance of perineal procedures for higher-risk individuals.

KEYWORDS:

• Rectal prolapse
• pelvic organ prolapse
• colorectal surgery
• clinical decision-making

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Tracy Stewart and Heidi Lee for their capturing information for the registry and following up with patients postoperatively.

Data sharing

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, BG, upon reasonable request.

Declaration of interest

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The contents of the paper and the opinions expressed within are those of the authors, and it was the decision of the authors to submit the manuscript for publication.Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.