Skip to Main Content (Press Enter)

Logo UNICATT
  • ×
  • Home
  • Degrees
  • Courses
  • People
  • Outputs
  • Projects
  • Expertise & Skills

UNI-FIND
Logo UNICATT

|

UNI-FIND

unicatt.it
  • ×
  • Home
  • Degrees
  • Courses
  • People
  • Outputs
  • Projects
  • Expertise & Skills
  1. Outputs

Tunneling of Mesh during Ventral Rectopexy: Technical Aspects and Long-Term Functional Results

Academic Article
Publication Date:
2023
Short description:
Campenni, P., Marra, A. A., De Simone, V., Litta, F., Parello, A., Ratto, C., Tunneling of Mesh during Ventral Rectopexy: Technical Aspects and Long-Term Functional Results, <>, 2022; 12 (1): 294-294. [doi:10.3390/jcm12010294] [https://hdl.handle.net/10807/236054]
abstract:
Avoiding the extensive damage of pelvic structures during ventral rectopexy could minimize secondary disfunctions. The objective of our observational study is to assess the safety and functional efficacy of a modified ventral rectopexy. In the modified ventral rectopexy, a retroperitoneal tunnel was created along the right side of rectum, connecting two peritoneal mini-incisions at the Douglas pouch and sacral promontory. The proximal edge of a polypropylene mesh, sutured over the ventral rectum, was pulled up through the retroperitoneal tunnel and fixed to the sacral promontory. In all patients, radiopaque clips were placed on the mesh, making it radiographically “visible”. Before surgery and at follow up visits, Altomare, Longo, CCSS, PAC-SYM, and CCFI scores were collected. From March 2010 to September 2021, 117 patients underwent VR. Modified ventral rectopexy was performed in 65 patients, while the standard ventral rectopexy was performed in 52 patients. The open approach was used in 97 cases (55 and 42 patients in modified and standard VR, respectively), while MI surgery was used in 20 cases (10 and 10 patients in modified and standard VR, respectively). A slightly shorter operative time and hospital stay were observed following modified ventral rectopexy (though this was not statistically significant). Similar overall complication rates were registered in the modified vs. standard ventral rectopexies (4.6% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.779). At follow-up, the Longo score (14.0 ± 8.6 vs. 11.0 ± 8.2, p = 0.042) and “delta” values of Altomare (9.2 ± 6.1 vs. 5.9 ± 6.3, p = 0.008) and CCSS (8.4 ± 6.3 vs. 6.1 ± 6.1, p = 0.037) scores were significantly improved in the modified ventral rectopexy group. A similar occurrence of symptoms recurrence was diagnosed in the two groups. Radiopaque clips helped to accurately diagnose mesh detachment/dislocation. The proposed modified VR seems to be feasible and safe. Marking the mesh intraoperatively seems useful.
Iris type:
Articolo in rivista, Nota a sentenza
Keywords:
fecal incontinence; obstructed defecation syndrome; pelvic disorders; rectal prolapse; ventral rectopexy
List of contributors:
Campenni, P.; Marra, Angelo Alessandro; De Simone, V.; Litta, Francesco; Parello, Angelo; Ratto, Carlo
Handle:
https://publicatt.unicatt.it/handle/10807/236054
Full Text:
https://publicatt.unicatt.it//retrieve/handle/10807/236054/703063/jcm-12-00294.pdf
Published in:
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Journal
  • Research Fields

Research Fields

Concepts (2)


LS7_7 - Surgery - (2011)

Settore MED/18 - CHIRURGIA GENERALE
  • Use of cookies

Powered by VIVO | Designed by Cineca | 26.4.5.0