Addition of anal encirclement to perineal proctosigmoidectomy: a retrospective review.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Frontiers in Surgery Pub Date : 2025-01-24 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fsurg.2025.1492690
Aiya Amery, Kayla Marritt, Zarrukh Baig, Haven Roy, Dilip Gill, Nathan Ginther
{"title":"Addition of anal encirclement to perineal proctosigmoidectomy: a retrospective review.","authors":"Aiya Amery, Kayla Marritt, Zarrukh Baig, Haven Roy, Dilip Gill, Nathan Ginther","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2025.1492690","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The optimal approach for the surgical management of rectal prolapse is individualized based on anatomical, functional, and surgical factors. In patients with significant comorbidities, perineal approaches are often preferred even though they are associated with higher recurrence rates compared to an abdominal approach. Although anal encirclement was one of the first procedures described for this condition, it is seldom employed given its high recurrence rates. There is currently a lack of data addressing a combination surgery, wherein both a perineal proctosigmoidectomy and anal encirclement are performed simultaneously.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy of combining perineal proctosigmoidectomy with anal encirclement using Nylon sutures compared to perineal proctosigmoidectomy alone.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single institution, non-randomized, retrospective study conducted at the Royal University Hospital, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada (July 2017 to October 2022). Patients over the age of 18 with full-thickness rectal prolapse who underwent either perineal proctosigmoidectomy alone or perineal proctosigmoidectomy with anal encirclement were included. There were 23 patients in the perineal proctosigmoidectomy group and 21 patients in the perineal proctosigmoidectomy with anal encirclement group. The primary outcome was prolapse recurrence. Secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay, and post-operative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients who received perineal proctosigmoidectomy with anal encirclement had significantly lower rates of recurrent prolapse (9.5%) compared to perineal proctosigmoidectomy alone (34.8%) (<i>p</i> = 0.02). Patients who underwent the combined procedure had a shorter length of stay by 2.3 days (<i>p</i> = 0.03). There was no difference in post-operative complications or operating time.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Routine anal encirclement in perineal proctosigmoidectomy reduces recurrence rates and length of stay without increasing operating time or complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":"12 ","pages":"1492690"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11802564/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2025.1492690","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The optimal approach for the surgical management of rectal prolapse is individualized based on anatomical, functional, and surgical factors. In patients with significant comorbidities, perineal approaches are often preferred even though they are associated with higher recurrence rates compared to an abdominal approach. Although anal encirclement was one of the first procedures described for this condition, it is seldom employed given its high recurrence rates. There is currently a lack of data addressing a combination surgery, wherein both a perineal proctosigmoidectomy and anal encirclement are performed simultaneously.

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy of combining perineal proctosigmoidectomy with anal encirclement using Nylon sutures compared to perineal proctosigmoidectomy alone.

Methods: This was a single institution, non-randomized, retrospective study conducted at the Royal University Hospital, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada (July 2017 to October 2022). Patients over the age of 18 with full-thickness rectal prolapse who underwent either perineal proctosigmoidectomy alone or perineal proctosigmoidectomy with anal encirclement were included. There were 23 patients in the perineal proctosigmoidectomy group and 21 patients in the perineal proctosigmoidectomy with anal encirclement group. The primary outcome was prolapse recurrence. Secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay, and post-operative complications.

Results: Patients who received perineal proctosigmoidectomy with anal encirclement had significantly lower rates of recurrent prolapse (9.5%) compared to perineal proctosigmoidectomy alone (34.8%) (p = 0.02). Patients who underwent the combined procedure had a shorter length of stay by 2.3 days (p = 0.03). There was no difference in post-operative complications or operating time.

Conclusions: Routine anal encirclement in perineal proctosigmoidectomy reduces recurrence rates and length of stay without increasing operating time or complications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Surgery
Frontiers in Surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
1872
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evidence of surgical interventions go back to prehistoric times. Since then, the field of surgery has developed into a complex array of specialties and procedures, particularly with the advent of microsurgery, lasers and minimally invasive techniques. The advanced skills now required from surgeons has led to ever increasing specialization, though these still share important fundamental principles. Frontiers in Surgery is the umbrella journal representing the publication interests of all surgical specialties. It is divided into several “Specialty Sections” listed below. All these sections have their own Specialty Chief Editor, Editorial Board and homepage, but all articles carry the citation Frontiers in Surgery. Frontiers in Surgery calls upon medical professionals and scientists from all surgical specialties to publish their experimental and clinical studies in this journal. By assembling all surgical specialties, which nonetheless retain their independence, under the common umbrella of Frontiers in Surgery, a powerful publication venue is created. Since there is often overlap and common ground between the different surgical specialties, assembly of all surgical disciplines into a single journal will foster a collaborative dialogue amongst the surgical community. This means that publications, which are also of interest to other surgical specialties, will reach a wider audience and have greater impact. The aim of this multidisciplinary journal is to create a discussion and knowledge platform of advances and research findings in surgical practice today to continuously improve clinical management of patients and foster innovation in this field.
期刊最新文献
Mendelian randomization analysis reveals causal relationship between tonsillectomy and irritable bowel syndrome. Case Report: Severe acute pancreatitis accompanied by gastric mucosal exfoliation hemorrhage: clinical alerts and novel insights. The long-term outcome of children with VP shunt and hydrocephalus: motor developmental outcome and QOL of patients with hydrocephalus is associated with the number of revisional procedures but is not impacted by the type of the valve. Conception of a mobile health application targeting early postoperative physiotherapeutic care after total knee replacement, a qualitative study. Current update on surgical management for spinal tuberculosis: a scientific mapping of worldwide publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1