Meta-analysis of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy versus posterior sutured rectopexy for management of complete rectal prolapse

Objectives To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy (LMR) and laparoscopic posterior sutured rectopexy (LPSR) in patients with rectal prolapse. Methods We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases and bibliographic reference lists with application of a combination of free text and controlled vocabulary search adapted to thesaurus headings, search operators, and limits. Recurrence, Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS), Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score (CCCS), surgical site infections, procedure time, and length of hospital stay were the evaluated outcome measures. Results We identified 5 comparative studies reporting a total of 307 patients evaluating outcomes of LMR ( n =160) or LPSR ( n =147) in patients with rectal prolapse. LMR was associated with significantly lower recurrence rate (OR: 0.28, P =0.009) but longer procedure time (MD: 23.93, P