A comparative study between transanal and transabdominal approaches in treatment of complete rectal prolapse

Abstract

Abstract Purpose There is a wide variety of surgical methods to treat rectal prolapse; however, to date, no clear agreement exists regarding the most effective surgical method. This study was designed to compare the results according to the surgical approach for complete rectal prolapse in women. Methods This study was conducted from March 2016 to February 2021 on female patients with rectal prolapse who underwent surgery. First, all patients were classified into mucosal and complete layer groups to confirm the difference in results between the two groups, and only complete layer prolapse patients were divided into transanal and abdominal approaches to compare parameters and functional outcomes in each group. Results A total of 180 patients were included, with an average age of 71.7 years and 102 complete prolapses. The complete layer group was found to have more abdominal access, longer operating time, and higher recurrence rates compared to the mucosal layer group. (p < 0.001) When targeting only the complete layer patients, there were 65 patients with the transanal and 37 with the abdominal (laparoscopic) approaches. The abdominal approach group had a longer operating time and hospital stay (p < 0.001, respectively) and lower recurrence rate than the transanal group (transanal vs. abdominal, 38% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.003), while the Wexner constipation and incontinence scores showed improved results in both groups. Conclusion Although operating time and hospitalization period were shorter in the transanal group, laparoscopic abdominal surgery is a procedure that can reduce the recurrent rate for complete rectal prolapse.