Rectal-prolapse repair in men is safe, but outcomes are not well understood

Vitaliy Y. Poylin*, Jennifer L. Irani, Reza Rahbar, Muneera R. Kapadia

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Scopus citations


Introduction: Rectal prolapse is a condition that occurs infrequently in men and there is little literature guiding treatment in this population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surgical approach and outcomes of rectal-prolapse repair in men. Methods: A retrospective multicenter review was conducted of consecutive men who underwent rectal-prolapse repair between 2004 and 2014. Surgical approaches and outcomes, including erectile function and fecal continence, were evaluated. Results: During the study period, 58 men underwent rectal-prolapse repair and the mean age of repair was 52.7 6 24.1 years. The mean follow-up was 13.2 months (range, 0.5–117 months). The majority of patients underwent endoscopic evaluation (78%), but few patients underwent anal manometry (16%), defecography (9%) or ultrasound (3%). Ten patients (17%) underwent biofeedback/pelvic-floor physical therapy prior to repair. Nineteen patients (33%) underwent a perineal approach (most were perineal proctosigmoidectomy). Thirty-nine patients (67%) underwent repair using an abdominal approach (all were suture rectopexy) and, of these, 77% were completed using a minimally invasive technique. The overall complication rate was 26% including urinary retention (16%), which was more common in patients undergoing the perineal approach (32% vs. 8%, P ¼ 0.028), urinary-tract infection (7%) and wound infection (3%). The overall recurrence rate was 9%, with no difference between abdominal and perineal approaches. Information on sexual function was missing in the majority of patients both before and after surgery (76% and 78%, respectively). Conclusion: Rectal-prolapse repair in men is safe and has a low recurrence rate; however, sexual function was poorly recorded across all institutions. Further studies are needed to evaluate to best approach to and functional outcomes of rectal-prolapse repair in men.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)279-282
Number of pages4
JournalGastroenterology Report
Issue number4
StatePublished - Aug 1 2019


  • Men
  • Rectal prolapse
  • Sexual function
  • Surgical procedure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology


Dive into the research topics of 'Rectal-prolapse repair in men is safe, but outcomes are not well understood'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this