Evidence Hub

The effect of total colectomy with posterior suture rectopexy in patients with internal prolapse and colonic inertia; A case series on 9 women

S. Tabatabaei, Seyed Hamzeh Mousavie, Hamed Vaseghi, Hossein Khadem Sedaghat, Mahdi Alemrajabi

International journal of surgery case reports, 2025

9 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Introduction and importance The benefits of ventral mesh rectopexy, performed by laparoscopic method, simultaneous with total laparoscopic colectomy, for patients with internal rectal prolapse (IRP), have been shown previously. Considering the advantages of posterior suture rectopexy in patients with colonic inertia, we hypothesized that patients with IRP and colonic inertia may benefit from combination of posterior suture rectopexy with total laparoscopic colectomy, while this has not been evaluated, to date. Case presentation In the present study, we performed laparoscopic posterior rectopexy with total colectomy on 9 women with refractory constipation, who were indicated for surgical correction of chronic constipation, due to obstructed defecation syndrome and IRP grade 2 and 3; IRP was diagnosed based on the results of defecography and colonic inertia based on impaired colon transit time. Clinical discussion The results showed significant reduction in Wexner constipation score, form of stool, and patient assessment of constipation quality of life (PAC–QOL). Conclusion This case series suggest the feasibility and advantages of performing total laparoscopic colectomy and laparoscopic posterior suture rectopexy in patients with IRP and colonic inertia, indicated for surgical correction of constipation. In future, cohort and clinical trials can identify the superiority of this combinational method over each method alone.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 9 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free