Rectal prolapse in the elderly: trends in surgical management and outcomes from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database.

BACKGROUND

Full thickness rectal prolapse (FTRP) is managed with an abdominal or perineal operation. Traditionally, the approach has been determined by patient age and comorbidities. Our aim was to determine operative trends and outcomes for repair of FTRP in elderly patients using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database.

STUDY DESIGN

We queried the ACS NSQIP database from 2006 to 2009 for patients with FTRP who were 70 years of age or older. Patients were grouped according to type of surgical repair: laparoscopic (LR), open (OR), or perineal (PR) technique. We reviewed demographics, operative trends of surgical technique, and short-term outcomes for each group.

RESULTS

A total of 816 patients were analyzed; 596 (73%) PR, 130 (16%) OR, and 90 (11%) LR patients. Patients who received OR and LR had lower mean American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores than PR patients (2.6, 2.5, and 2.7, respectively, p < 0.001). The percentage of LR and OR procedures decreased as age increased by decade; the inverse was seen for PR (p < 0.001). The distribution of operative techniques has not changed from year to year. Length of stay was significantly shorter for LR (3.77 days) and PR (3.44 days) patients vs OR patients (6.23 days) (p = 0.01). Complication rates were 2.22%, 8.72%, and 12.31% for LR, PR, and OR, respectively (p = 0.021). Open surgery was the only factor associated with an increased complication rate, with an odds ratio of 6.29 (95% CI 1.38 to 28.6, p < 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the appeal of perineal proctectomy in the elderly and debilitated patient, the approach to FTRP is slowly evolving in the era of laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic repair of FTRP in the elderly is associated with improved short-term outcomes when compared with OR and PR.