Skip to main content
. 2015 Sep 10;7(12):1045–1054. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v7.i12.1045

Table 3.

Comparative rectopexy studies (open vs laparoscopic, different procedures)

Study Procedure Patients Results
Sajid (2009) LR 330 No difference in Mort, Morb, Inc, Cons, recurrence shorter hospital stay for LR
Meta-analysis (12 studies) different procedures OR 358 Shorter operation times for OR
Caddedu (2012) LR 192 No difference in Mort, Morb, Inc, Cons, recurrence
Meta-analysis (8 studies) OR 275
different procedures
Senapeti (2013) SR 38 No difference in morbidity, recurrence and functional outcome
Randomised RR 40
Forminje (2014) LVR 40 More minor complications in LRR
Retrospective LRR 28 No difference in major complications, recurrence and functional outcome
Sahoo (2014) LPR 38 No differences in morbidity, recurrence and functional outcome
Retrospective LSR 32
Lechaux (2004) LRR 13 Significant more patients with worsening of constipation in the LMR-group (26% vs 8%)
Prospective LMR 35 No differences in morbidity and improvement of continence
Madbouly (2002) LRR 12 No difference in complications and functional outcome
Prospective LPR 12

Data from studies that compare open vs laparoscopic rectopexies or studies that compare different procedures. Mort: Mortality; Morb: Morbidity; Inc: Faecal incontinence; Cons: Constipation; LR: Laparoscopic rectopexy; OR: Open rectopexy; SR: Suture rectopexy; RR: Resection rectopexy; LPR: Laparoscopic posterior mesh rectopexy; HS: Hospital stay; OT: Operation time.