We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Surgical approach, complications, and reoperation rates of combined rectal and pelvic organ prolapse surgery.
- Authors
Wallace, Shannon L.; Syan, Raveen; Enemchukwu, Ekene A.; Mishra, Kavita; Sokol, Eric R.; Gurland, Brooke
- Abstract
Objectives: Our primary objective was to determine rectal prolapse (RP) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) reoperation rates and postoperative < 30-day complications after combined RP and POP surgery at a single institution. Methods: This was an IRB-approved retrospective cohort study of all female patients who received combined RP and POP surgery at a single tertiary care center from 2008 to 2019. Recurrence was defined as the need for subsequent repeat RP or POP surgery at any point after the index surgery. Surgical complications were separated into Clavien-Dindo classes. Results: Sixty-three patients were identified, and 18.3% (12/63) had < 30-day complications (55% Clavien-Dindo grade 1; 27% Clavien-Dindo grade 2; 18% Clavien-Dindo grade 4). Of patients undergoing combined abdominal RP and POP repair, no postoperative < 30-day complications were noted in the MIS group compared to 37.5% of those patients in the laparotomy group (p < 0.01). Overall, in those patients who underwent combined RP and POP surgery, the need for subsequent RP surgery for recurrent RP was 14% and the need for subsequent POP surgery for recurrent POP was 4.8% (p = 0.25). Conclusion: In this cohort of women undergoing combined RP and POP surgery, a higher proportion required subsequent RP surgery compared to those requiring subsequent POP surgery, although this was not statistically significant. Almost one-fifth of patients undergoing combined RP and POP surgery experienced a < 30-day surgical complication, regardless of whether the approach was perineal or abdominal. For those patients undergoing abdominal repair, < 30-day complications were more likely in those patients who had a laparotomy compared to those who had a minimally invasive surgery.
- Subjects
PELVIC organ prolapse; MINIMALLY invasive procedures; VAGINAL surgery; REOPERATION; RECTAL prolapse; SURGICAL complications
- Publication
International Urogynecology Journal, 2020, Vol 31, Issue 10, p2101
- ISSN
0937-3462
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1007/s00192-020-04394-2