Abdominal rectovaginopexy (original) (raw)

Abstract

PURPOSE: We noted the combination of obstructed defecation or constipation and fecal incontinence, the poor results of abdominal rectopexy for constipation, and the well-known risk of postoperative induction of constipation after rectopexy. We developed a new operation to treat patients with constipation or fecal incontinence (with a concomitant rectocele, internal rectal intussusception, enterocele at dynamic defecography, or all three) or both. This new rectopexy technique avoided dorsolateral mobilization of the rectum and did not endanger the hypogastric nerves and pelvic autonomic nerves. A better effect on constipation compared with rectopexies with dorsolateral mobilization was expected. METHODS: The results of this new operation, which was called rectovaginopexy, were studied prospectively in a series of 27 patients. Four-year results were obtained. Preoperative and postoperative questionnaires, dynamic defecograms, and anorectal physiology studies were analyzed. RESULTS: Before the operation 17 patients were constipated, compared with 4 patients one year after rectovaginopexy (76 percent improvement;_P_=0.0015) and 5 patients four years after rectovaginopexy (71 percent improvement;_P_=0.005), respectively. At one year, fecal incontinence decreased significantly: 15 of 17 patients improved and 9 patients became fully continent (_P_=0.0007). Four years after rectovaginopexy the effect on fecal incontinence was no longer significant (_P_=0.09). Rectovaginopexy restored anatomy: all (9) enteroceles, all but 1 (17) internal rectal intussusception, and 12 of 20 rectoceles dissolved, and the majority were reduced in size. Rectal sensation for distention was unchanged, and rectal electrosensitivity improved (_P_=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Rectovaginopexy provides significant one-year improvement of both constipation and fecal incontinence. The positive effect on constipation did not deteriorate with time, in contrast to the effect on fecal incontinence.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sun WM. Obstructed defecation. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1993;8:383–9.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  2. Bartolo D, Roe A. Obstructed defaecation. Br J Hosp Med 1986;35:228–36.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  3. Lennard-Jones JE. Clinical management of constipation. Pharmacology 1993;47:216–23.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  4. Drossman DA, Sandler RS, McKee DC, Lovitz AJ. Bowel patterns among subjects not seeking health care. Use of a questionnaire to identify a population with bowel dysfunction. Gastroenterology 1982;83:529–34.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  5. Scaglia M, Fasth S, Hallgren T, Nordgren S, Oresland T, Hulten L. Abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse: influence of surgical technique on functional outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:805–13.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  6. Speakman CT, Madden MV, Nicholls RJ, Kamm MA. Lateral ligament division during rectopexy causes constipation but prevents recurrence: results of a prospective randomized study. Br J Surg 1991;78:1431–3.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  7. Luukkonen P, Mikkonen U, Jarvinen H. Abdominal rectopexy with sigmoidectomy vs. rectopexy alone for rectal prolapse: a prospective, randomized study. Int J Colorectal Dis 1992;7:219–22.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
  8. Sayfan J, Pinho M, Alexander Williams J, Keighley MR. Sutured posterior abdominal rectopexy with sigmoidectomy compared with Marlex rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 1990;77:143–5.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  9. Delemarre JB, Gooszen HG, Kruyt RH, Soebhag R, Geesteranus AM. The effect of posterior rectopexy on fecal continence: a prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:311–6.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  10. Christiansen J, Zhu B-W, Rasmussen OO, Sorensen M. Internal rectal intussusception: results of surgical repair. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:1026–8.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  11. Athanasiadis S, Heiligers J. Value of abdominal rectopexy in obstructive disorders of defecation. A prospective study using a defecation index, manometry and radiology [in German]. Langenbecks Arch Chir 1993;378:92–101.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
  12. Moschowitz AV. The pathogenesis, anatomy and care of prolapse of the rectum. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1912;15:7.
    Google Scholar
  13. Janssen LW, van Vroonhoven TJ. Chirurgische Therapie der chronischen Obstipation. In: Muller-Lissner SA, Akkermans LM, eds. Chronische Obstipation und Stuhlinkontinenz. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1989:315–29.
    Google Scholar
  14. Rectovaginopexy [videotape]. New York: American College of Surgeons Video Library c/o Ciné-Med Inc., 1991.
  15. Recto-colpo-pexy [videotape]. Utrecht: Utrecht University Press, 1992.
  16. Browning GG, Parks AG. Postanal repair for neuropathic faecal incontinence: correlation of clinical result and anal canal pressures. Br J Surg 1983;70:101–4.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  17. Duthie GS, Bartolo DC. Abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a comparison of techniques. Br J Surg 1992;79:107–13.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  18. Arndorfer RC, Stef JJ, Dodds WJ, Linehan JH, Hogan WJ. Improved infusion system for intraluminal esophageal manometry. Gastroenterology 1977;73:23–7.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  19. Kamm MA, Lennard-Jones JE. Rectal mucosal electrosensory testing—evidence for a rectal sensory neuropathy in idiopathic constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:419–23.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  20. Mahieu P, Pringot J, Bodart P. Defecography: I. Description of a new procedure and results in normal patients. Gastrointest Radiol 1984;9:247–51.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
  21. Mahieu P, Pringot J, Bodart P. Defecography: II. Contribution to the diagnosis of defecation disorders. Gastrointest Radiol 1984;9:253–61.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
  22. Shorvon PJ, McHugh S, Diamant NE, Somers S, Stevenson GW. Defecography in normal volunteers: results and implications. Gut 1989;30:1737–49.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  23. Mann CV, Hoffman C. Complete rectal prolapse: the anatomical and functional results of treatment by an extended abdominal rectopexy. Br J Surg 1988;75:34–7.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  24. Tjandra JJ, Fazio VW, Church JM, Milsom JW, Oakley JR, Lavery IC. Ripstein procedure is an effective treatment for rectal prolapse without constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:501–7.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
  25. Broden G, Dolk A, Holmstrom B. Evacuation difficulties and other characteristics of rectal function associated with procidentia and the Ripstein operation. Dis Colon Rectum 1988;31:283–6.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  26. Madden MV, Kamm MA, Nicholls RJ, Santhanam AN, Cabot R, Speakman CT. Abdominal rectopexy for complete prolapse: prospective study evaluating changes in symptoms and anorectal function. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:48–55.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  27. Selvaggi F, Canonico S, Riegler G,et al. Operative behandlung des internen rectumprolapses. Randomisierte untersuchung.. Coloproctology 1994;16:341–5.
    Google Scholar
  28. Delemarre JB, Kruyt RH. Aspects of anorectal physiology and anorectal pathophysiology [dissertation]. Leiden, The Netherlands: Leiden University; 1993.
    Google Scholar
  29. Orrom WJ, Bartolo DC, Miller R, Mortensen NJ, Roe AM. Rectopexy is an ineffective treatment for obstructed defecation. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:41–6.
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
  30. Lee JF, Maurer VM, Block GE. Anatomic relations of pelvic autonomic nerves to pelvic operations. Arch Surg 1973;107:324–8.
    PubMed Google Scholar
  31. Delemarre JB, Kruyt RH, Doornbos J,et al. Anterior rectocele: assessment with radiographic defecography, dynamic magnetic resonance imaging, and physical examination. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:249–59.
    Google Scholar
  32. Janssen LW, van Dijke CF. Selection criteria for anterior rectal wall repair in symptomatic rectocele and anterior rectal wall prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:1100–7.
    Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. From the Department of Surgery of the University Hospital Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
    R. Silvis M.D., Ph.D., H. G. Gooszen M.D., Ph.D., A. van Essen M.D., A.Th. C. M. de Kruif & L. W. M. Janssen M.D., Ph.D.

Authors

  1. R. Silvis M.D., Ph.D.
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  2. H. G. Gooszen M.D., Ph.D.
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  3. A. van Essen M.D.
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  4. A.Th. C. M. de Kruif
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  5. L. W. M. Janssen M.D., Ph.D.
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Silvis, R., Gooszen, H.G., van Essen, A. et al. Abdominal rectovaginopexy.Dis Colon Rectum 42, 82–88 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02235188

Download citation

Key words