Pneumoretroperitoneum after a STARR Procedure Performed One Year after a Posterior Colporrhaphy: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Transanal rectal resection with a stapling instrument (STARR) has been shown to be effective and safe for the treatment of obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS). Nevertheless, the wide range of complications described in the literature necessitates a rigorous patient selection and a tailored approach for the management of complications. We present here a case of pneumoretroperitoneum which occurred after a STARR procedure for ODS was performed nearly a year after previous anterior and posterior colporrhaphy. The diagnostic workup did not reveal a staple-line defect. Laparoscopy did not show any intra-abdominal pathology. The symptoms resolved under oral antibiotics. The patient was discharged on day 10 after admission. Scarring in the rectovaginal septum from a colporrhaphy 1 year earlier might have contributed to a suboptimal staple-line closure during the STARR procedure, leading to a pneumoretroperitoneum. We discuss this complication and provide a brief review of the literature.

Outcomes of a modified Bresler procedure for the treatment of rectocele with rectal intussusception

Background Obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) is a condition that is frequently caused by rectocele and rectal intussusception. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a modified Bresler procedure for the treatment of ODS. The outcomes of this modified procedure were compared with the stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) procedure. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of the clinical data from 76 female patients who presented with ODS between June 2014 and June 2016. The patients were divided into two treatment groups, namely Modified and STARR. Patients in the Modified group (n = 36) underwent the modified Bresler procedure, which involved posterior rectal-wall resection using a circular tubular stapler with multilevel purse-string sutures. Patients in the STARR group (n = 40) underwent the standard STARR procedure. We analysed post-operative complications, Wexner constipation scores (WCS), rectocele depths, and four-point post-operative satisfaction scales. Results Patients in the Modified group exhibited shorter operative times and fewer post-operative complications (both P < 0.05). At 12 months post-operatively, both the Modified and STARR groups displayed a significant improvement in the Wexner constipation score and the depth of rectocele. The post-operative WCS for the Modified group were significantly improved compared to those for the STARR group (P < 0.05), while there was no significant difference in the rectocele depth between the two groups (P > 0.05). Post-operative interviews at post-operative 12 months showed that patients in the Modified group had a better satisfaction (P = 0.05). Conclusions Our modified procedure may be an effective treatment strategy for patients experiencing ODS caused by rectocele and rectal intussusception, with fewer complications and effective relief of symptoms.

Short-term outcomes after anterior stapling rectotomy using a single stapler device for rectocele

Background Stapled transanal rectal segmental resection (STARR) is a technique for treatment of obstructive defecation syndrome (ODS) when associated with rectocele and/or intussusceptions. Objectives To evaluate a simplified method using a single stapler device for isolated anterior rectal wall correction of structural abnormalities (single-STARR technique). Materials and methods Patients who were diagnosed with ODS underwent the single-STARR procedure. Their baseline symptoms were measured by using a modified obstructed defecation syndrome (MODS) questionnaire score. Evacuation proctography was performed to exclude functional anorectal disorders. Colonoscopy was selectively performed and for all patients older than 50 years. Single-STARR procedure was performed in cases where there was no evidence of an inflammatory, metabolic, neoplastic process, or functional disorders. The summed global score of ODS ranged from 0 (normal) to 24 (severe). Outcomes were determined by evaluating the postoperative improvement using a MODS score. Results A total of 9 patients (mean (SD) age 53 (13.6) years) with ODS were eligible for the study. Both rectocele and intussusceptions were diagnosed from preoperative defecography in 7 of the patients. Single-STARR was successfully performed without intraoperative complications in all patients with a mean operative time of 52 (12.7) min. The mean severity of symptoms decreased significantly at the 3rd and 6th (P < 0.01) month after surgery. However, one-third of patients experienced persistence of symptoms or symptom score deterioration on the 12th month after surgery. Conclusion The single-STARR procedure provided short-term symptom relief with no serious postoperative complication in a small series of 9 cases.

Postoperative MR Defecography following Failed STARR Procedure for Obstructive Defecation Syndrome: A Three-Centre Experience

Aim. To describe the abnormalities at MR imaging and related complaints in patients with poor outcome after STARR procedure. Materials and Methods. The medical records of 21 symptomatic patients from centre 1, 31 patients from centre 2, and 63 patients from centre 3 were reviewed with regard to findings at MR defecography and related symptoms. Results. Regardless of the centre, most relevant imaging features and related complaints were (a) impaired emptying (82.11%), related complaint ODS; (b) persistent rectocele >2 cm and intussusception (39.3%), split evacuation and digitation; (c) pelvic organ descent on straining (39.8%), prolapse sensation; (d) small neorectum and loss of contrast (32.5%), urgency and incontinence; (e) anastomotic stricture and granuloma (28.4%), pain; and (f) nonrelaxing puborectalis muscle (19.5%), tenesmus. Less frequent findings included rectal pocket formation (5.6%) and rectovaginal sinus tract (1.6%). Patients were referred to MR imaging with an average time interval of 5 ± 2, 4 ± 1, and 2 ± 1 years in the three centres, respectively, and only rarely by the same surgeon who performed the operation: 1/21 (4.8%) in centre 1, 3/39 (7.7%) in centre 2, and 9/63 (14.3%) in centre 3. Conclusion. Most surgeons involved in STARR operation with subsequent poor outcome do not rely on MR imaging.