Kelley Jesse K, Hagen Edward R, Gurland Brooke, Stevenson Andrew Rl, Ogilvie James W
General Surgery Residency, Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA.
General Surgery, Corewell Health, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA.
BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol. 2023 Nov 14;5(1):e000198. doi: 10.1136/bmjsit-2023-000198. eCollection 2023.
There is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal approach for patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse. The aim of this international survey was to assess the patterns in treatment of rectal prolapse.
A 23-question survey was distributed to the Pelvic Floor Consortium of the American Society of Colorectal Surgeons, the Colorectal Surgical Society of Australia and New Zealand, and the Pelvic Floor Society. Questions pertained to surgeon and practice demographics, preoperative evaluation, procedural preferences, and educational needs.
Electronic survey distributed to colorectal surgeons of diverse practice settings.
249 colorectal surgeons responded to the survey, 65% of which were male. There was wide variability in age, years in practice, and practice setting.
Responses to questions regarding preoperative workup preferences and clinical scenarios.
In preoperative evaluation, 19% would perform anorectal physiology testing and 70% would evaluate for concomitant pelvic organ prolapse. In a healthy patient, 90% would perform a minimally invasive abdominal approach, including ventral rectopexy (56%), suture rectopexy (31%), mesh rectopexy (6%) and resection rectopexy (5%). In terms of ventral rectopexy, surgeons in the Americas preferred a synthetic mesh (61.9% vs 38.1%, p=0.59) whereas surgeons from Australasia preferred biologic grafts (75% vs 25%, p<0.01). In an older patient with comorbidities 81% would perform a perineal approach. Procedure preference (Delormes vs Altmeier) varied according to location (Australasia, 85.9% vs 14.1%; Europe, 75.3% vs 24.7%; Americas, 14.1% vs 85.9%). Most participants were interested in education regarding surgical approaches, however there is wide variability in preferred methods.
There is significant variability in the preoperative evaluation and surgery performed for rectal prolapse. Given the lack of consensus, it is not surprising that most surgeons desire further education on the topic.
对于全层直肠脱垂患者的最佳治疗方法,目前尚无共识。这项国际调查的目的是评估直肠脱垂的治疗模式。
向美国结直肠外科医师协会盆底联合会、澳大利亚和新西兰结直肠外科学会以及盆底协会发放了一份包含23个问题的调查问卷。问题涉及外科医生和执业情况的人口统计学信息、术前评估、手术方式偏好以及教育需求。
向不同执业环境的结直肠外科医生发放电子调查问卷。
249名结直肠外科医生回复了调查问卷,其中65%为男性。年龄、执业年限和执业环境差异很大。
对术前检查偏好和临床情况相关问题的回答。
在术前评估中,19%的医生会进行肛肠生理测试,70%的医生会评估是否合并盆腔器官脱垂。对于健康患者,90%的医生会采用微创腹部手术方式,包括腹侧直肠固定术(56%)、缝合直肠固定术(31%)、网状直肠固定术(6%)和切除直肠固定术(5%)。就腹侧直肠固定术而言,美洲的外科医生更倾向于使用合成网片(61.9%对38.1%,p = 0.59),而澳大拉西亚的外科医生更倾向于使用生物移植物(75%对25%,p<0.01)。对于患有合并症的老年患者,81%的医生会采用经会阴手术方式。手术方式偏好(德洛姆手术与阿尔特迈尔手术)因地区而异(澳大拉西亚,85.9%对14.1%;欧洲,75.3%对24.7%;美洲,14.1%对85.9%)。大多数参与者对手术方式的教育感兴趣,然而,首选方法差异很大。
直肠脱垂的术前评估和手术方式存在显著差异。鉴于缺乏共识,大多数外科医生希望就该主题接受进一步教育也就不足为奇了。