Table 6.
Results of the Altemeier Procedure for Rectal Prolapse.
| Authors | No. of patients | Design | Morbidity (%) | Mortaility (%) | Improvement of continence (%) | Improvement of constipation (%) | New onset of constipation (%) | Recurrence No. (%) | Follow-up (month) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kimmis et al. 2001[81] | 63 | Retrospective | 11 | 0 | 28 | 51 | 0 | 4 (6) | 21* |
| Chun et al. 2004[82] | 120 | Retrospective | 22 | 1 | improved score | NS | NS | 18 (17) | 29* |
| Boccasanta et al. 2006[83] | 40 | Randomized | 0 | 0 | improved score | 75 | NS | 5 (13) | 29* |
| Habr-gama et al. 2006[84] | 44 | Retrospective | 9 | 0 | 86 | NS | NS | 2 (5) | 49* |
| Glasgow et al. 2008[85] | 103 | Retrospective | 9 | 1 | 42 | 10 | NS | 9 (9) | 36* |
| Altomare et al. 2009[86] | 93 | Retrospective | 23 | 0 | 47 | NS | NS | 17 (18) | 41* |
| Kim et al. 2010[87] | 38 | Prospective | 18 | 3 | improved score | 38 | NS | 1 (3) | 24# |
| Cirocco et al. 2010[88] | 103 | Retrospective | 14 | 0 | 85 | 94 | NS | 0 (0) | 43* |
| Lee et al. 2011[89] | 123 | Retrospective | 14 | NS | NS | NS | NS | 14 (11) | 13* |
| Ris et al. 2012[90] | 60 | Prospective | 12 | 2 | 62 | NS | NS | 8 (13) | 48# |
| Ding et al. 2012[91] | 136 | Retrospective | 17 | 0 | NS | NS | NS | 29 (21) | 43* |
| Senapati et al. 2013[74] | 106 | Randomized | 4 | 2 | improved score | NS | NS | 24 (24) | 36# |
| Tiengtianthum et al. 2014[92] | 518 | Retrospective | 9 | 0.4 | NS | NS | NS | 118 (23) | 16 |
| Mik et al. 2015[93] | 45 | Retrospective | 4 | 0 | NS | NS | NS | 6 (13) | 32 |
| Elagili et al. 2015[94] | 22 | Retrospective | 23 | 0 | NS | NS | NS | 2 (9) | 13# |
| Pinheiro et al. 2016[95] | 33 | Retrospective | 9 | 0 | NS | NS | NS | 8 (27) | 50* |
| Trompetto et al. 2019[96] | 34 | Retrospective | 38 | 0 | 32 | 62 | NS | 12 (35) | 49# |
NS, not stated; *mean; # median