title: Recurrence rates after abdominal surgery for complete rectal prolapse: a multicenter pooled analysis of 643 individual patient data.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This study was designed to determine what impact surgical technique, means of access, and method of rectopexy have on recurrence rates following abdominal surgery for full-thickness rectal prolapse.
  
  
  METHODS
  Consecutive individual patient data on age, gender, surgical technique (mobilization-only, mobilization-resection-pexy, or mobilization-pexy), means of access (open or laparoscopic), rectopexy method (suture or mesh), follow-up length, and recurrences were collected from 15 centers performing abdominal surgery for full-thickness rectal prolapse between 1979 and 2001. Recurrence was defined as the presence of full-thickness rectal prolapse after abdominal surgery. Chi-squared test and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were used to assess statistical heterogeneity. Recurrence-free curves were generated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test, respectively.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Abdominal surgery consisted of mobilization-only (n = 46), mobilization-resection-pexy (n = 130), or mobilization-pexy (n = 467). There were 643 patients. After excluding center 8, there was homogeneity on recurrence rates among the centers with recurrences (n = 8) for age (hazards ratio, 0.6; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.2-1.7; P = 0.405), gender (hazards ratio, 0.6; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.1-2.3; P = 0.519), and center (hazards ratio, 0.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.1-1.5; P = 0.142). However, there was heterogeneity between centers with (n = 8) and without recurrences (n = 6) for gender (P = 0.0003), surgical technique (P < 0.0001), means of access (P = 0.01), and rectopexy method (P < 0.0001). The median length of follow-up of individual centers varied from 4 to 127 months (P < 0.0001). There were 38 recurrences at a median follow-up of 43 (range, 1-235) months. The pooled one-, five-, and ten-year recurrence rates were 1.06, 6.61, and 28.9 percent, respectively. Age, gender, surgical technique, means of access, and rectopexy method had no impact on recurrence rates.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Although this study is likely underpowered, the impact of mobilization-only on recurrence rates was similar to that of other surgical techniques.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15212, USA.
authors.forename: Yannis
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Raftopoulos
authors.forename: Anthony J
authors.initials: AJ
authors.lastname: Senagore
authors.forename: Giuseppe
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Di Giuro
authors.forename: Roberto
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Bergamaschi
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000379:methods*; D007813:Laparotomy / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012005:Rectal Prolapse / Q000601:surgery*; D012008:Recurrence; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D013526:Surgical Mesh; D013536:Suture Techniques; D016896:Treatment Outcome