Kapan, Murat Dicle Üniversitesi - Tıp Fakültesi - Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Turkey , Önder, Akın Dicle Üniversitesi - Tıp Fakültesi - Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Turkey , Polat, Serkan Dicle Üniversitesi - Tıp Fakültesi - Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Türkiye , Aliosmanoglu, İbrahim Dicle Üniversitesi - Tıp Fakültesi - Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Türkiye , Taskesen, Fatih Dicle Üniversitesi - Tıp Fakültesi - Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Türkiye , Arikanoglu, Zülfü Dicle Üniversitesi - Tıp Fakültesi - Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Türkiye , Gül, Mesut Dicle Üniversitesi - Tıp Fakültesi - Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Türkiye , Taçyıldız, İbrahim Dicle Üniversitesi - Tıp Fakültesi - Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Türkiye

Abdominal and perineal approaches in the surgical treatment of rectal prolapse

26523

Introduction: Rectal prolapse is a disease, which is an important cause of social and functional problems and has a continuing debate about the ideal surgical treatment of itself. In this study, we aimed to investigate the abdominal and perineal approaches with early and late postoperative result in the patients undergoing surgery for rectal prolapse. Materials and methods: Between 2006-2011, the records of 21 patients undergoing surgery with the diagnosis of rectal prolapse were reviewed, retrospectively. The demographic and physical examination findings, surgical procedures, early and late postoperative complications, recurrence and mortality rates were recorded. Results: The median age was 43 years and female/male ratio was 1.63/1. The most common presenting complaint was gas control failure and often wetting with mucus. Stage 1 and stage 3 rectal prolapses was detected in 19% and 81% of the patients, respectively. The most common surgical procedure was Notaras (54%). Early postoperative complications were seen in 14.3% of the patients. There were no postoperative recurrence, mortality and complication requiring re-exploration. Advanced age and shorter duration of hospital stay were determined and often performed under regional anesthesia in the patients undergoing perineal approach. No statistical differences were observed in terms of early postoperative complications and recurrence. Conclusion: Results of abdominal and perineal approaches were similar, when they were applied with taking into account the risk factors for surgical treatment, findings of the patients and the surgeon’s experience.

83

rectal prolapse , surgery , abdominal , perineal.

Dicle Medical Journal

88