Comparison of surgical outcome of rectopexy with and without sigmoid resection for full-thickness rectal prolapse

Purpose: This study was undertaken to evaluate the necessity of sigmoid resection for rectal prolapse. Materials and Methods: Between January 2000 and January 2007, a total of 31 patients underwent rectopexy with and without sigmoid resection for rectal prolapse. The data were retropectively collected for the age, sex, previous abdominal surgery, morbidity, concomitant disease, recurrence, duration of operation, and length of hospital stay. Results: Rectopexy was performed in 18 patients (Group I), and sigmoid resection plus rectopexy was performed in 13 patients (Group II). The mean age of the patients was 57 (range, 34-76) years and 74% were woman. Atelectasis and wound infections were the most frequent morbidities. The medical and surgical complication rates were not significantly different between the rectopexy and rectopexy with resection groups (P = 1.00 and P= 0.09). Although operation time was significantly different (P=0.01), length of hospital stay was not significantly different (P=0.34) among the groups. There were no recurrence or mortality. Conclusion: Although the number of patients is small and this feature restricts the study, our experience indicates that rectopexy with and without sigmoid resection were safe, and effective for the treatment of rectal prolapse. Sigmoid resection did not increase morbidity. It is well suited to patients with a long redundant sigmoid and history of constipation.