{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04697156983930779, 'fraction_numerical': 0.042027194066749075, 'mean_word_length': 4.74113475177305, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Modified Stapled Transanal Rectal Resection Procedure for Limited Rectal Prolapse: A Viable Alternative to the Delorme Operation

Purpose. The optimal surgical approach for full-thickness rectal prolapse (FTRP) remains controversial. In China, patients with limited FTRP (<5 cm in length) are usually managed by perineal surgery. We retrospectively assessed the outcome of Delorme’s procedure and compared it with modified stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR). Methods. The study was conducted in 2 public tertiary referral centers in China with modified STARR or Delorme's procedure performed by experienced surgeons. Outcomes assessed recurrence, operative times, blood loss, complications, length of hospital stay, and continence and constipation scoring. Results. Between December 2012 and May 2019, 65 patients were assessed, including 48 with modified STARR (group 1) and 17 with Delorme’s procedure (group 2). The median follow-up was 22 months (range, 3-86 months). The mean operative time for group 1 was 37.4 ± 17.5 minutes vs 74.3 ± 30.6 minutes for group 2 (P < .001). The blood loss for group 1 was significantly lower than that for group 2 (17.4 ± 15.9 mL vs 27.8 ± 16.7 mL, respectively; P = .028). There was no significant difference between groups in recurrence (group 1 18.8% vs group 2 23.5%; P = .944) with no effect of operation type. Both procedures showed improvement in constipation and continence scoring with a similar impact. Conclusions. Modified STARR and the Delorme operation are comparable in managing limited FTRP with superior results in operative time and blood loss for STARR.