Mesh Rectopexy or Resection Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse; Is There a Gold Standard Method: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

Georgios Koimtzis,Leandros Stefanopoulos,Georgios Geropoulos, Christopher G. Chalklin,Ioannis Karniadakis, Awad A. Alawad, Vyron Alexandrou,Nikos Tteralli,Eliot Carrington-Windo, Andreas Papacharalampous,Kyriakos Psarras

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE(2024)

引用 0|浏览1
暂无评分
摘要
(1) Background: Rectal prolapse is a benign condition that mainly affects females and the elderly. The most common symptoms are constipation and incontinence. The treatment of choice is surgical, but so far, there has been no gold standard method. The aim of this study is to compare the two most common intrabdominal procedures utilized for treating rectal prolapse: the resection rectopexy and the mesh rectopexy. (2) Methods: In this study, we conducted a thorough systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature and compared the two different approaches regarding their complication rate, recurrence rate, and improvement of symptoms rate. (3) Results: No statistically significant difference between the two methods was found regarding the operating time, the length of stay, the overall complication rate, the surgical site infection rate, the cardiopulmonary complication rate, the improvement in constipation and incontinence rates, and the recurrence rate. (4) Conclusions: Our study revealed that mesh rectopexy and resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse have similar short- and long-term outcomes. As a result, the decision for the procedure used should be individualized and based on the surgeon's preference and expertise.
更多
查看译文
关键词
rectal prolapse,resection rectopexy,mesh rectopexy
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要