Laparoscopic pelvic floor three-level internal repair in the treatment of male internal rectal prolapse
10.3760/cma.j.cn113855-20230118-00026
- VernacularTitle:腹腔镜盆底三水平整体修复治疗男性直肠内脱垂的临床疗效分析
- Author:
Siyuan WANG
1
;
Yongli CAO
;
Yuanyao ZHANG
;
Yang YANG
;
Weiwei YANG
;
Yilu LI
;
Dong WEI
Author Information
1. 解放军联勤保障部队第九八九医院全军肛肠外科研究所，洛阳 471031
- Keywords:
Rectal prolapse;
Pelvic floor;
Reconstructive surgical procedure;
Proctectomy;
Laparoscopes
- From:
Chinese Journal of General Surgery
2023;38(9):685-689
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic pelvic floor three-level internal repair and stapled transanal rectum resection (STARR) in the treatment of male patients with intrarectal prolapse. Mlethds A total of 101 male patients with rectal intrarectal prolapse from Feb 2013 to Oct 2017 were enrolled into this study. Fifty-two patient in group A received laparoscopic pelvie floor three-level internal repair, and 49 patients in group B received STARR. The Wexner incontinence scale (WIS), Wexner constipation scale (WCS) score, gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) and degree of internal rectal prolapse (DIRP) were systematically evaluated before surgery and 3 months, 1 year and 3 years after surgery. Results:There were no significant differences in age, BMI, number of bowel movements(BM), WIS, WCS, GIQLI and DIRP between the two groups before surgery(all P>0.05). The WIS, WCS, GIQLI and DIRP in 3 months, 1year and 3 years after surgery in both two groups were significantly better than those before surgery ( t=20.169, 25.229, 27.278, 23.818, 23.489, 21.152, -3.550, -23.042, -22.901, 82.852, 40.915, 30.010, 11.323, 13.237, 11.452, 19.473, 18.647, 17.108, -8.791, -5.254, -5.846, 37.439, 30.598, 22.852, all P<0.001). The GIQLI in Group A was significantly better than that of group B at 1 year and 3 years after surgery ( P<0.001) but close to that in Group B at 3 months after surgery ( t=1.428, P=0.156). The WIS, WCS and DIRP in group A were significantly better than those in group B at 3 months, 1 year and 3 years after surgery, with statistical significance ( t=-8.243, -15.688, -20.193, -4.268, -4.768, -4.851, 11.329, 13.543, -5.399, -4.745, -4.598, all P<0.001). There was no signifcant difference in grade Ⅰ-Ⅲ complications between the two groups (χ 2=0.046, P=1.00). Conclusion:Laparoscopic pelvic floor three-level internal repair is more effective than transanal STARR in the treatment of male internal rectal prolapse.
