Comparison of laparoscopic and open surgery for total rectal prolapse.

PURPOSE: Total rectal prolapse is a devastating disorder causing constipation and anal incontinence. We compared open and laparoscopic surgical approaches in a limited series.

METHODS: The subjects of this study were 23 patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures (LP group) and 17 patients who underwent open procedures (OP group) for rectal prolapse. We assessed the preoperative colonic transit time, postoperative pain scoring, pre- and postoperative anal functions, and changes in constipation and related symptoms.

RESULTS: The median operation time was 140.8 min for the LP group and 113.1 min for the OP group (P = 0.037). The median postoperative hospital stay was 4.8 days after the LPs and 9.6 days after the OPs (P = 0.001). Less analgesia was needed in the early postoperative period after the LPs (P = 0.007). While more than 70% improvement in continence was seen in the patients who underwent OPs, it was about 85% in those who underwent LPs. Improvement in constipation and related symptoms were similar in both groups. More than 30% of patients still suffered from hard stools and other symptoms of constipation. The colonic transit times were reduced in about 50% of patients who had suffered constipation in both groups. There was no incidence of recurrence in the median follow-up period.

CONCLUSION: Although transabdominal rectopexy has been performed conventionally for rectal prolapse for many years, laparoscopic rectopexy and laparoscopic resection rectopexy are associated with lower morbidity and less postoperative pain. We eliminated the total prolapse and cured incontinence in almost all patients, with a short hospital stay.