Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVR) has gained increasing acceptance for the treatment of patients with a full-thickness rectal prolapse (RP), but literature on follow-up of at least 10 years is scarce. We studied recurrence rate, long-term functional results and quality of life in patients who had LVR for RP more than 12 years ago.

The study population consisted of patients who could be contacted among the 175 who had undergone LVR for RP and whose short- and medium-term outcomes were published in 2012. We studied the long-term recurrence rate (Kaplan-Meier), functional outcome (Wexner and ODS scores), quality of life (EuroQol) and satisfaction of the patient through clinical examination(s), specific scores and questionnaires.

Of the 175 patients, 14 patients had exclusion criteria, 57 had died, and 42 were lost to follow-up, leaving 62 patients for analysis. Seventeen patients presented with a recurrence (10.5%) at the 10-year follow-up. The only statistically significant risk factor for recurrence was recurrent RP (HR = 11.5 (2.54-52.2), P = 0.002). The median faecal incontinence score was 4 (0-10) and significantly worse in patients who had a recurrence [12 (7-13) vs 3 (0-9); P = 0.016]. The median obstructive defaecation score was 6 (3-12). The median quality of life score was 7 (6-8). Most patients who presented with a recurrence said they would undergo the operation again and recommended it, as would patients with no recurrence.

LVR for RP is a safe and efficient technique with sustainable long-term results that shows long-term efficacy at > 10 years after the operation.

This manuscript from Chapter 2 of the International Urogynecology Consultation (IUC) on Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) reviews the literature involving the clinical evaluation of a patient with POP and associated bladder and bowel dysfunction.

An international group of 11 clinicians performed a search of the literature using pre-specified search MESH terms in PubMed and Embase databases (January 2000 to August 2020). Publications were eliminated if not relevant to the clinical evaluation of patients or did not include clear definitions of POP. The titles and abstracts were reviewed using the Covidence database to determine whether they met the inclusion criteria. The manuscripts were reviewed for suitability using the Specialist Unit for Review Evidence checklists. The data from full-text manuscripts were extracted and then reviewed.

The search strategy found 11,242 abstracts, of which 220 articles were used to inform this narrative review. The main themes of this manuscript were the clinical examination, and the evaluation of comorbid conditions including the urinary tract (LUTS), gastrointestinal tract (GIT), pain, and sexual function. The physical examination of patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) should include a reproducible method of describing and quantifying the degree of POP and only the Pelvic Organ Quantification (POP-Q) system or the Simplified Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (S-POP) system have enough reproducibility to be recommended. POP examination should be done with an empty bladder and patients can be supine but should be upright if the prolapse cannot be reproduced. No other parameters of the examination aid in describing and quantifying POP. Post-void residual urine volume >100 ml is commonly used to assess for voiding difficulty. Prolapse reduction can be used to predict the possibility of postoperative persistence of voiding difficulty. There is no benefit of urodynamic testing for assessment of detrusor overactivity as it does not change the management. In women with POP and stress urinary incontinence (SUI), the cough stress test should be performed with a bladder volume of at least 200 ml and with the prolapse reduced either with a speculum or by a pessary. The urodynamic assessment only changes management when SUI and voiding dysfunction co-exist. Demonstration of preoperative occult SUI has a positive predictive value for de novo SUI of 40% but most useful is its absence, which has a negative predictive value of 91%. The routine addition of radiographic or physiological testing of the GIT currently has no additional value for a physical examination. In subjects with GIT symptoms further radiological but not physiological testing appears to aid in diagnosing enteroceles, sigmoidoceles, and intussusception, but there are no data on how this affects outcomes. There were no articles in the search on the evaluation of the co-morbid conditions of pain or sexual dysfunction in women with POP.

The clinical pelvic examination remains the central tool for evaluation of POP and a system such as the POP-Q or S-POP should be used to describe and quantify. The value of investigation for urinary tract dysfunction was discussed and findings presented. The routine addition of GI radiographic or physiological testing is currently not recommended. There are no data on the role of the routine assessment of pain or sexual function, and this area needs more study. Imaging studies alone cannot replace clinical examination for the assessment of POP.

Mechanistic understanding of anorectal (patho)physiology is missing to improve the medical care of patients suffering from defaecation disorders. Our objective is to show that complex fluid dynamics modelling of video defaecography may open new perspectives in the diagnosis of defaecation disorders. Based on standard X-ray video defaecographies, we developed a bi-dimensional patient-specific simulation of the expulsion of soft materials, the faeces, by the rectum. The model quantified velocity, pressure and stress fields during the defaecation of a neostool with soft stool-like rheology for patients showing normal and pathological defaecatory function. In normal defaecation, the proximal-distal pressure gradient resulted from both the anorectal junction which formed a converging channel and the anal canal. The flow of the neostool through these anatomical parts was dominated by its shear-thinning viscous properties, rather than its yield stress. Consequently, the evacuation flow rate was significantly affected by variations in pressure applied by the rectum, and much less by the geometry of the anorectal junction. Lastly, we simulated impaired defaecations in the absence of obvious obstructive phenomena. Comparison with normal defaecation allowed us to discuss critical elements which should lead to effective medical management.

Despite the numerous available clinical investi-gation tests, the associated alteration of quality of life and the socio-economic cost, it remains difficult for physicians to identify the pathophysiological origins of defecation disorders and therefore to provide the appropriate clinical care. Based on standardized dynamic X-ray defecography, we developed a 2D patient-specific computational fluid dynamic model of rectal evacuation. X-ray defecography was carried out in a sitting position with a standardized paste whose yield stress matched that of soft human feces. The flow was simulated with lattice-Boltzmann methods for yield stress fluids and moving boundary conditions. The model was applied for a patient with a normal recto-anal function. We deduced from the flow field that the main flow resistance during the defecation was due to the extrusion of the paste through the anal canal. We calculated also from pressure and stress fields the spatio-temporal evolution of the wall normal stress. This latter highlighted a gradient from the proximal to the distal part of the rectum. We discussed how this new set of hydrodynamical and biome-chanical parameters could be interpreted to gain new insights on the physiology of defecation and to diagnose underlying evacuation disorders. Clinical relevance - If confirmed, our approach should allow clinicians to obtain other parameters from a classic clinical examination and thus better adapt the response of clinicians to the defecation disorders observed in patients.

The aim of this work was to study the technical success and diagnostic capability of magnetic resonance defaecography (MRD) compared with video defaecography (VD).

Sixty four women with defaecation disorders underwent both MRD and x-ray VD over 1 year. The assessment by two radiologists in consensus was retrospective and blinded. The technical success of straining and evacuation was evaluated subjectively. The presence of enterocele, intussusception, rectocele and dyssynergic defaecation was analysed according to established criteria, with VD as the standard of reference.

It was found that 62/64 (96.9%) VD studies were technically fully diagnostic compared with 29/64 (45.3%) for MRD. The number of partially diagnostic studies was 1/64 (1.6%) for VD versus 21/64 (32.8%) for MRD, with 1/64 (1.6%) (VD) and 14/64 (21.9%) (MRD) being nondiagnostic. Thirty enteroceles were observed by VD compared with seven in MRD with moderate agreement (κ = 0.41). Altogether 53 intussusceptions were observed by VD compared with 27 by MRD with poor agreement (κ = -0.10 and κ = 0.02 in recto-rectal and recto-anal intussusception, respectively). Moderate agreement (κ = 0.47) was observed in diagnosing rectocele, with 47 cases by VD and 29 by MRD. Dyssynergic defaecation was observed in three patients by VD and in 11 patients by MRD, with slight agreement (κ = 0.14).

The technical success and diagnostic capabilities of VD are better than those of MRD. VD remains the method of choice in the imaging of defaecation disorders.

Pelvic floor disorders including pelvic organ prolapse (POP), urinary dysfunction, defecatory dysfunction, and complications after pelvic floor surgery are relatively common in the female population. Imaging tests are obtained when the initial clinical evaluation is thought to be incomplete or inconclusive or demonstrates findings that are discordant with patients' symptoms. An integrated imaging approach is optimal to evaluate the complex anatomy and dynamic functionality of the pelvic floor. Fluoroscopic cystocolpoproctography (CCP) and MR defecography are considered the initial imaging tests of choice for evaluation of POP. Fluoroscopic voiding cystourethrography is considered the initial imaging test for patients with urinary dysfunction. Fluoroscopic CCP and MR defecography are considered the initial imaging test for patients with defecatory dysfunction, whereas ultrasound pelvis transrectal is a complementary test in patients requiring evaluation for anal sphincter defects. MRI pelvis without and with intravenous contrast, MRI pelvis with dynamic maneuvers, and MR defecography are considered the initial imaging tests in patients with suspected complications of prior pelvic floor surgical repair. Transperineal ultrasound is emerging as an important imaging tool, in particular for screening of pelvic floor dysfunction and for evaluation of midurethral slings, vaginal mesh, and complications related to prior pelvic floor surgical repair. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Obstructed defaecation syndrome (ODS) is difficulty in evacuating stools, requiring straining efforts at defaecation, having the sensation of incomplete evacuation, or the need to manually assist defaecation. This is due to a physical blockage of the faecal stream during defaecation attempts, caused by rectocele, enterocele, intussusception, anismus or pelvic floor descent. Evacuation proctography (EP) is the most common imaging technique for diagnosis of posterior pelvic floor disorders. It has been regarded as the reference standard because of extensive experience, although it has been proven not to have perfect accuracy. Moreover, EP is invasive, embarrassing and uses ionising radiation. Alternative imaging techniques addressing these issues have been developed and assessed for their accuracy. Because of varying results, leading to a lack of consensus, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature are required.

To determine the diagnostic test accuracy of EP, dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and pelvic floor ultrasound for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with ODS, using latent class analysis in the absence of a reference standard, and to assess whether MRI or ultrasound could replace EP. The secondary objective was to investigate differences in diagnostic test accuracy in relation to the use of rectal contrast, evacuation phase, patient position and cut-off values, which could influence test outcome.

We ran an electronic search on 18 December 2019 in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, SCI, CINAHL and CPCI. Reference list, Google scholar. We also searched WHO ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible articles. Two review authors conducted title and abstract screening and full-text assessment, resolving disagreements with a third review author.

Diagnostic test accuracy and cohort studies were eligible for inclusion if they evaluated the test accuracy of EP, and MRI or pelvic floor ultrasound, or both, for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with ODS. We excluded case-control studies. If studies partially met the inclusion criteria, we contacted the authors for additional information.

Two review authors performed data extraction, including study characteristics, 'Risk-of-bias' assessment, sources of heterogeneity and test accuracy results. We excluded studies if test accuracy data could not be retrieved despite all efforts. We performed meta-analysis using Bayesian hierarchical latent class analysis. For the index test to qualify as a replacement test for EP, both sensitivity and specificity should be similar or higher than the historic reference standard (EP), and for a triage test either specificity or sensitivity should be similar or higher. We conducted heterogeneity analysis assessing the effect of different test conditions on test accuracy. We ran sensitivity analyses by excluding studies with high risk of bias, with concerns about applicability, or those published before 2010. We assessed the overall quality of evidence (QoE) according to GRADE.

Thirty-nine studies covering 2483 participants were included into the meta-analyses. We produced pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for all index tests for each target condition. Findings of the sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main analysis. Sensitivity of EP for diagnosis of rectocele was 98% (credible interval (CrI)94%-99%), enterocele 91%(CrI 83%-97%), intussusception 89%(CrI 79%-96%) and pelvic floor descent 98%(CrI 93%-100%); specificity for enterocele was 96%(CrI 93%-99%), intussusception 92%(CrI 86%-97%) and anismus 97%(CrI 94%-99%), all with high QoE. Moderate to low QoE showed a sensitivity for anismus of 80%(CrI 63%-94%), and specificity for rectocele of 78%(CrI 63%-90%) and pelvic floor descent 83%(CrI 59%-96%). Specificity of MRI for diagnosis of rectocele was 90% (CrI 79%-97%), enterocele 99% (CrI 96%-100%) and intussusception 97% (CrI 88%-100%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with high QoE. MRI did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Heterogeneity analysis showed that sensitivity of MRI performed with evacuation phase was higher than without for rectocele (94%, CrI 87%-98%) versus 65%, CrI 52% to 89%, and enterocele (87%, CrI 74%-95% versus 62%, CrI 51%-88%), and sensitivity of MRI without evacuation phase was significantly lower than EP. Specificity of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) for diagnosis of rectocele was 89% (CrI 81%-96%), enterocele 98% (CrI 95%-100%) and intussusception 96% (CrI 91%-99%); sensitivity for anismus was 92% (CrI 72%-98%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with high QoE. TPUS did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Heterogeneity analysis showed that sensitivity of TPUS performed with rectal contrast was not significantly higher than without for rectocele(92%, CrI 69%-99% versus 81%, CrI 58%-95%), enterocele (90%, CrI 71%-99% versus 67%, CrI 51%-90%) and intussusception (90%, CrI 69%-98% versus 61%, CrI 51%-86%), and was lower than EP. Specificity of endovaginal ultrasound (EVUS) for diagnosis of rectocele was 76% (CrI 54%-93%), enterocele 97% (CrI 80%-99%) and intussusception 93% (CrI 72%-99%); sensitivity for anismus was 84% (CrI 59%-96%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with very low to moderate QoE. EVUS did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Specificity of dynamic anal endosonography (DAE) for diagnosis of rectocele was 88% (CrI 62%-99%), enterocele 97% (CrI 75%-100%) and intussusception 93% (CrI 65%-99%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with very low to moderate QoE. DAE did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Echodefaecography (EDF) had a sensitivity of 89% (CrI 65%-98%) and specificity of 92% (CrI 72%-99%) for intussusception, meeting the criteria to replace EP but with very low QoE. Specificity of EDF for diagnosis of rectocele was 89% (CrI 60%-99%) and for enterocele 97% (CrI 87%-100%); sensitivity for anismus was 87% (CrI 72%-96%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with low to very low QoE.

In a population of women with symptoms of ODS, none of the imaging techniques met the criteria to replace EP. MRI and TPUS met the criteria of a triage test, as a positive test confirms diagnosis of rectocele, enterocele and intussusception, and a negative test rules out diagnosis of anismus. An evacuation phase increased sensitivity of MRI. Rectal contrast did not increase sensitivity of TPUS. QoE of EVUS, DAE and EDF was too low to draw conclusions. More well-designed studies are required to define their role in the diagnostic pathway of ODS.

Data on the pathogenesis and symptoms of enterocele are limited. The objectives of this study were to determine the clinical phenotype of patients with enterocele, to highlight the main functional and/or anatomical associations and to improve the accuracy of the preoperative assessment of pelvic floor disorders.

A total of 588 patients who were referred to a tertiary unit for an anorectal complaint completed a self-administered questionnaire and underwent physical examination, anorectal manometry and defaecography. Using defaecography, enterocele was defined as a radiological hernia of the small bowel into an enlarged rectovaginal space. One hundred and thirty-five patients with enterocele were age- and gender-matched with 270 patients without enterocele. Factors associated with enterocele were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis models.

Patients with enterocele were less frequently obese than patients without enterocele (8/135 vs 36/270; P = 0.02) and more frequently had a past history of pelvic surgery (51/135 vs 75/270; P = 0.04). They complained more frequently of pelvic pain on bearing down (29/135 vs 24/270; P = 0.003), anal procidentia (37/135 vs 46/270; P = 0.01) and more frequently had irritable bowel syndrome (83/135 vs 131/270; P = 0.01) and severe constipation according to the Kess score (104/135 vs 182/270; P = 0.04). Anorectal function was comparable between the two groups. Patients with enterocele had more frequent rectoceles and overt rectal prolapses than patients without enterocele.

Enterocele should be investigated in patients with chronic pelvic pain, overt rectal prolapse and/or a past history of pelvic surgery.

Rectal evacuation involves multiple mechanisms that are not completely understood. The aim of this study was to quantify the rheologic property, i.e., yield stress, which governs the ease of deformation of a range of faeces of differing consistency and understand its influence on the pathophysiology of defaecation.

Yield stresses of faeces of differing consistencies and Bristol scores were determined by the Vane test. We then explored the effects of this property on ease of defecation using a simple static model of the recto-anal junction based on the laws of flow for yield stress pastes and checked the conclusions by X-ray defaecography experience.

The yield stress of faeces increased exponentially with their solid content, from 20 to 8000 Pa. The static model of the recto-anal junction showed that evacuation of faeces of normal consistency and yield stress is possible with moderate dilatation of the anal canal, whilst the evacuation of faeces with higher yield stress requires greater dilatation of the anal canal. X-ray defaecography showed that such increases occurred in vivo.

The diameter of the recto-anal junction is increased to enable the passage of feces with high yield stress. The finite limits to such dilation likely contribute to fecal impaction. Hence, difficulties in defaecation may result either from unduly high yield stress or pathologies of reflex recto-anal dilatation or a combination of the two.

To evaluate the reason for failure of STARR (stapled transanal rectal resection) operation for obstructed defecation.

A retrospective study (June 2012-December 2017) was performed using a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent STARR operation for ODS (obstructed defecation syndrome), complaining of persisting or de novo occurrence of pelvic floor dysfunctions. Postoperative St Mark's and ODS scores were evaluated. A VAS was used to score pelvic pain. Patients' satisfaction was estimated administering the CPGAS (clinical patient grading assessment scale) questionnaire. Objective evaluation was performed by dynamic proctography and anorectal manometry.

Ninety patients (83.3% females) operated for ODS using STARR technique were evaluated. Median ODS score was 19 while 20 patients (22%) reported de novo fecal urgency and 4 patients a worsening of their preoperative fecal incontinence. Dynamic proctography performed in 54/90 patients showed a significant (> 3.0 cm) rectocele in 19 patients, recto-rectal intussusception in 10 patients incomplete emptying in 24 patients. When compared with internal normal standards, anorectal manometry showed decreased rectal compliance and maximum tolerable volume in patients with urgency. Nine patients reported a persistent postoperative pelvic pain (median VAS score 6).

Failure of STARR to treat ODS, documented by persisting ODS symptoms, fecal urgency, or chronic pelvic pain, is often justified by the persistence or de novo onset of alteration of the anorectal anatomy at defecation. This occurs in about half of the patients, but in 40% of the cases who complained of incomplete emptying or incontinence, anatomical abnormalities were not recognized.

Ventral rectopexy can be performed robotically with only limited trauma for the patient, making its performance in an ambulatory setting potentially interesting. The aim of this study is to report our preliminary experience with ambulatory robotic ventral rectopexy in consecutive patients.

Ten consecutive patients underwent robotic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse (n=8) or symptomatic enterocele (n=2) between February 2014 and April 2015. Patients were selected for outpatient treatment based on criteria of patient motivation, favorable social conditions, and satisfactory general condition. Patient characteristics, technical results and cost were reported.

The mean operating time was 94minutes (range: 78-150). The average operating room occupancy time was 254minutes (222-339). There were no operative complications, conversion to laparotomy, or postoperative complication. The average duration of hospital stay was 11 (8-32) hours. Two patients required hospitalization: one for persistent pain and the other for urinary retention. The average maximum pain score recorded on postoperative day 1 was 2/10 on a visual analog scale (range: 0-5/10). Estimated average cost (excluding amortization of the purchase of the robot) was €9088 per procedure.

Ambulatory management of robotic ventral rectopexy is feasible and safe.

Magnetic resonance defecography (MRD) allows for dynamic visualisation of the pelvic floor compartments when assessing for pelvic floor dysfunction. Additional benefits over traditional techniques are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to compare detection and miss rates of pelvic floor abnormalities with MRD versus clinical examination and traditional fluoroscopic techniques.

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with recommendations from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were accessed. Studies were included if they reported detection rates of at least one outcome of interest with MRD versus EITHER clinical examination AND/OR fluoroscopic techniques within the same cohort of patients.

Twenty-eight studies were included: 14 studies compared clinical examination to MRD, and 16 compared fluoroscopic techniques to MRD. Detection and miss rates with MRD were not significantly different from clinical examination findings for any outcome except enterocele, where MRD had a higher detection rate (37.16% with MRD vs 25.08%; OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.21-4.11, p = 0.010) and lower miss rates (1.20 vs 37.35%; OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.20, p = 0.0001) compared to clinical examination. However, compared to fluoroscopy, MRD had a lower detection rate for rectoceles (61.84 vs 73.68%; OR 0.48 95% CI 0.30-0.76, p = 0.002) rectoanal intussusception (37.91 vs 57.14%; OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.66, p = 0.002) and perineal descent (52.29 vs 74.51%; OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.74, p = 0.006). Miss rates of MRD were also higher compared to fluoroscopy for rectoceles (15.96 vs 0%; OR 15.74, 95% CI 5.34-46.40, p < 0.00001), intussusception (36.11 vs 3.70%; OR 10.52, 95% CI 3.25-34.03, p = 0.0001) and perineal descent (32.11 vs 0.92%; OR 12.30, 95% CI 3.38-44.76, p = 0.0001).

MRD has a role in the assessment of pelvic floor dysfunction. However, clinicians need to be mindful of the risk of underdiagnosis and consider the use of additional imaging.

To establish the diagnostic test accuracy of evacuation proctography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), transperineal ultrasonography, and endovaginal ultrasonography for detecting posterior pelvic floor disorders (rectocele, enterocele, intussusception, and anismus) in women with obstructed defecation syndrome and secondarily to identify the most patient-friendly imaging technique.

In this prospective cohort study, 131 women with symptoms of obstructed defecation syndrome underwent evacuation proctogram, MRI, and transperineal and endovaginal ultrasonography. Images were analyzed by two blinded observers. In the absence of a reference standard, latent class analysis was used to assess diagnostic test accuracy of multiple tests with area under the curve (AUC) as the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures were interobserver agreement calculated as Cohen's κ and patient acceptability using a visual analog scale.

No significant differences in diagnostic accuracy were found among the imaging techniques for all the target conditions. Estimates of diagnostic test accuracy were highest for rectocele using MRI (AUC 0.79) or transperineal ultrasonography (AUC 0.85), for enterocele using transperineal (AUC 0.73) or endovaginal ultrasonography (AUC 0.87), for intussusception using evacuation proctography (AUC 0.76) or endovaginal ultrasonography (AUC 0.77), and for anismus using endovaginal (AUC 0.95) or transperineal ultrasonography (AUC 0.78). Interobserver agreement for the diagnosis of rectocele (κ 0.53-0.72), enterocele (κ 0.54-0.94) and anismus (κ 0.43-0.81) was moderate to excellent, but poor to fair for intussusception (κ -0.03 to 0.37) with all techniques. Patient acceptability was better for transperineal and endovaginal ultrasonography as compared with MRI and evacuation proctography (P<.001).

Evacuation proctography, MRI, and transperineal and endovaginal ultrasonography were shown to have similar diagnostic test accuracy. Evacuation proctography is not the best available imaging technique. There is no one optimal test for the diagnosis of all posterior pelvic floor disorders. Because transperineal and endovaginal ultrasonography have good test accuracy and patient acceptability, we suggest these could be used for initial assessment of obstructed defecation syndrome.

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02239302.

The purpose of this prospective randomized study was to compare robot-assisted and laparoscopic ventral rectopexy procedures for posterior compartment procidentia in terms of restoration of the anatomy using magnetic resonance (MR) defaecography.

Sixteen female patients (four with total prolapse, twelve with intussusception) underwent robot-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy (RVMR) and 14 female patients (two with prolapse, twelve with intussusception) laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR). Primary outcome measures were perioperative parameters, complications and restoration of anatomy as assessed by MR defaecography, which was performed preoperatively and 3 months after surgery.

Patient demographics, operation length, operating theatre times and length of in-hospital stay were similar between the groups. The anatomical defects of rectal prolapse, intussusception and rectocele and enterocele were similarly corrected after rectopexy in either technique as confirmed with dynamic MR defaecography. A slight residual intussusception was observed in three patients with primary total prolapse (two RVMR vs one LVMR) and in one patient with primary intussusception (RVMR) (P = 0.60). Rectocele was reduced from a mean of 33.0 ± 14.9 mm to 5.5 ± 8.4 mm after RVMR (P < 0.001) and from 24.7 ± 17.5 mm to 7.2 ± 3.2 mm after LVMR (P < 0.001) (RVMR vs LVMR, P = 0.10).

Robot-assisted laparoscopic ventral rectopexy can be performed safely and within the same operative time as conventional laparoscopy. Minimally invasive ventral rectopexy allows good anatomical correction as assessed by MR defaecography, with no differences between the techniques.

Ventral rectopexy to the promontory has become one of the most strongly advocated surgical treatments for patients with full-thickness rectal prolapse and deep enterocele. Despite its challenges, laparoscopic ventral rectopexy with or without robotic assistance for selected patients can be performed with relatively minimal patient trauma thus creating the potential for same-day discharge. The aim of this prospective case-controlled study was to assess the feasibility, safety, and cost of day case robotic ventral rectopexy compared with routine day case laparoscopic ventral rectopexy.

Between February 28, 2014 and March 3, 2015, 20 consecutive patients underwent day case laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse or deep enterocele at Michallon University Hospital, Grenoble. Patients were selected for day case surgery on the basis of motivation, favorable social circumstances, and general fitness. One out of every two patients underwent the robotic procedure (n = 10). Demographics, technical results, and costs were compared between both groups.

Patients from both groups were comparable in terms of demographics and technical results. Patients operated on with the robot had significantly less pain (p = 0.045). Robotic rectopexy was associated with longer median operative time (94 vs 52.5 min, p < 0.001) and higher costs (9088 vs 3729 euros per procedure, p < 0.001) than laparoscopic rectopexy.

Day case robotic ventral rectopexy is feasible and safe, but results in longer operative time and higher costs than classical laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse and enterocele.

Posterior vaginal wall prolapse is one of the most common prolapses encountered by gynecological surgeons. What appears to be a straightforward condition to diagnose and treat surgically for physicians has proven to be frustratingly unpredictable with regard to symptom relief for patients. Functional disorders such as dyssynergic defecation and constipation are often attributed to posterior vaginal wall prolapse. Little scientific evidence supports this assumption, emphasizing that structure and function are not synonymous when treating posterior vaginal wall prolapse. Rectoceles, enteroceles, sigmoidoceles, peritoneoceles, rectal and intraanal intussusception, rectal prolapse, and descending perineal syndrome are all conditions that have an impact on the posterior vaginal wall. All too often these different anatomic conditions are treated with the same surgical approach, addressing a posterior vaginal wall bulge with a traditional posterior colporrhaphy. Studies that examine the correlation between stage of posterior wall prolapse and patient symptoms have failed to reliably do so. Surgical outcomes measured by prolapse staging appear successful, yet patient expectations are often not met. As increasing attention is being placed on patient satisfaction outcomes concerning surgical treatments, this fact will need to be addressed. Surgeons will have to clearly communicate what can and what cannot be expected with surgical repair of posterior vaginal wall prolapse.