Premium
Surgery for constipation: systematic review and practice recommendations
Author(s) -
MercerJones M.,
Grossi U.,
Pares D.,
Vollebregt P. F.,
Mason J.,
Knowles C. H.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
colorectal disease
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.029
H-Index - 89
eISSN - 1463-1318
pISSN - 1462-8910
DOI - 10.1111/codi.13772
Subject(s) - medicine , constipation , systematic review , medline , general surgery , surgery , intensive care medicine , political science , law
Abstract Aim To assess the outcomes of rectal excisional procedures in adults with chronic constipation. Method Standardised methods and reporting of benefits and harms were used for all CapaCi TY reviews that closely adhered to PRISMA 2016 guidance. Main conclusions were presented as summary evidence statements with a summative Oxford Centre for Evidence‐Based Medicine (2009) level. Results Forty‐seven studies were identified, providing data on outcomes in 8340 patients. Average length of procedures was 44 min and length of stay ( LOS ) was 3 days. There was inadequate evidence to determine variations in procedural duration or LOS by type of procedure. Overall morbidity rate was 16.9% (0–61%), with lower rates observed after Contour Transtar procedure (8.9%). No mortality was reported after any procedures in a total of 5896 patients. Although inconsistently reported, good or satisfactory outcome occurred in 73–80% of patients; a reduction of 53–91% in Longo scoring system for obstructive defecation syndrome ( ODS ) occurred in about 68–76% of patients. The most common long‐term adverse outcome is faecal urgency, typically occurring in up to 10% of patients. Recurrent prolapse occurred in 4.3% of patients. Patients with at least 3 ODS symptoms together with a rectocoele with or without an intussusception, who have failed conservative management, may benefit from a rectal excisional procedure. Conclusion Rectal excisional procedures are safe with little major morbidity. It is not possible to advise which excisional technique is superior from the point of view of efficacy, peri‐operative variables, or harms. Future study is required.