Cited by 38Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsAnorectal Disease Treatments and OutcomesColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments

Changes in bowel symptoms 1 year after rectocele repair

Open access
Sung, Vivian W., Rardin, Charles R., Raker, Christina A., LaSala, Christine A., Myers, Deborah L.·2012·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective We sought to evaluate changes in bowel symptoms after rectocele repair and identify risk factors for persistent symptoms.Study design We conducted ancillary analysis of a randomized surgical trial for rectocele repair. Subjects underwent examinations and completed questionnaires for bowel symptoms at baseline and 12 months postoperatively. Outcomes included resolution, persistence, or de novo bowel symptoms. We used multiple logistic regression to identify risk factors for bowel symptom persistence.Results A total of 160 women enrolled: 139 had baseline bowel symptoms and 85% had 12-month data. The prevalence of bowel symptoms decreased after rectocele repair (56% vs 23% splinting, 74% vs 37% straining, 85% vs 19% incomplete evacuation, 66% vs 14% obstructive defecation; P < .001 for all). On multiple logistic regression, a longer history of splinting was a risk factor for persistent postoperative splinting (adjusted odds ratio, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-4.93).Conclusion Bowel symptoms may improve after rectocele repair, but almost half of women will have persistent symptoms.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.06.054

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 23 · Cited by 38

Authors
Sung, V. W., Rardin, C. R., Raker, C. A., LaSala, C. A., & Myers, D. L.
Affiliations
  • Brown University (US)
  • Women & Infants Hospital of Rhode Island (US)
  • Hartford Hospital (US)
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-11
Volume
207
Issue
5
Pages
423.e1-423.e5
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1994155946
Cited by
38
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K23HD060665)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anorectal Disease Treatments and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Keywords
rectocele repair, bowel symptoms, postoperative outcomes, defecation symptoms, fecal incontinence, risk factors, symptom persistence, defecation straining, incomplete evacuation, obstructive defecation, pelvic floor surgery
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Constipation, Defecation, Fecal Incontinence, Female, Humans, Intestines, Middle Aged, Postoperative Period, Surveys and Questionnaires, Treatment Outcome, Rectocele

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review