Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Rectocele repair

Four years' experience
Authors: M W, Arnold; W R, Stewart; P S, Aguilar;

Rectocele repair

Abstract

A retrospective review of 64 rectocele repairs done over a four-year period was performed. The most common indication for repair was constipation. Thirty-five patients were repaired transanally, and 29 were repaired transvaginally. The overall morbidity was 34 percent, and the overall mortality was 0 percent. The most common complication was urinary retention in 12.5 percent. There was no difference in complications between techniques. Of 46 patients contacted for follow-up, 25 (54 percent) still complained of constipation, 17 (34 percent) had partial incontinence, 8 (17 percent) noted persistent rectal pain, 15 (32 percent) mentioned occasional rectal bleeding, and 10 (22 percent) complained of vaginal tightness or sexual dysfunction. Thirty-seven (80 percent) patients stated that they had improved after surgery. Except for persistent rectal pain, there was no difference in results between transanal and transvaginal repairs. Those undergoing transvaginal repair had a much greater problem with pain. Our relatively poor results may be due to an unselective approach to rectocele repair. The presence of both constipation and a rectocele does not imply an association, and a complete anorectal physiologic examination should precede repair. There is no functional difference between transvaginal and transanal rectocele repair.

Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Middle Aged, Urination Disorders, Postoperative Complications, Rectal Diseases, Methods, Humans, Female, Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage, Constipation, Fecal Incontinence, Aged, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    190
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
190
Top 10%
Top 1%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!