Cited by 4Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsAnorectal Disease Treatments and OutcomesHernia repair and management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pelvic pain is a common prolapse symptom and improvement after ventral mesh rectopexy is more frequent than deterioration or de novo pain

Abstract

AIM: The aim of this work was to assess the relationship between pelvic pain and rectal prolapse both before prolapse surgery and in the long term after ventral mesh rectopexy (VMR). METHOD: Patients undergoing VMR between 2004 and 2017 were contacted. Outcomes including the severity of pelvic pain were recorded using a numeric rating scale. RESULTS: Four hundred and seventy eight of the 749 patients (64%) were successfully contacted. Of these, 39% reported pre-existing pelvic pain prior to VMR (group A) and 61% were pain free (group B). The median follow-up time was 8.0 years (interquartile range 5.0-10.0 years). Symptoms of obstructed defaecation were significantly more common (p = 0.002) in group A (91/187, 49%) than in group B (101/291, 35%). In contrast, faecal incontinence was more common (p = 0.007) in group B (75/291, 26%) than in group A (29/187, 15%). In group A, 76% showed improvement in pelvic pain after VMR: 61% were pain free and 39% had partial improvement in their pre-existing pelvic pain. Patients with persistent pelvic pain were younger (p = 0.01) and more likely to have revisional surgery after VMR (p = 0.0003), but there was no relation to the indication for surgery (p = 0.59). In group B, 15% reported de novo pelvic pain after VMR, and this was more common in women under 50 years old (p = 0.001), when obstructed defaecation was the indication (p = 0.03), in mesh erosion (p = <0.05) and when associated with revisional surgery (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Pelvic pain is common (39%) in patients undergoing prolapse surgery, and VMR improves this pain in most patients (76%). However, a significant number of patients fail to improve (12%), experience worsening of pain (12%) or develop de novo pelvic pain (15%).

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/codi.16321

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 48 references

1 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ellington DR, 2013, Pelvic floor symptoms and quality of life analyses in women undergoing surgery for rectal prolapse, World J Colorectal Surg., 3, 3
  2. CumberlegeJ.First do no harm: the report of the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review;2020. Accessed July 8 2020.https://www.immdsreview.org.uk/Report.html

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 4

Metadata

Authors
Singh, S., Bolckmans, R., Ratnatunga, K., Gorissen, K., Jones, O., Lindsey, I., & Cunningham, C.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Singh, Sandeep
Venue
Colorectal Disease
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-09-13
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
118-127
ISSN
  • 1462-8910 (ISSN-L)
  • 1463-1318
OpenAlex
W4294146904
Cited by
3
References
48
Citations by year
2025: 3
FWCI
0.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Colorectal Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anorectal Disease Treatments and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hernia repair and management
Keywords
pelvic pain, rectal prolapse, ventral mesh rectopexy, obstructed defecation, fecal incontinence, mesh erosion, revisional surgery, long-term outcomes, pelvic floor dysfunction
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Laparoscopy, Rectal Prolapse, Rectum, Surgical Mesh, Treatment Outcome, Pelvic Pain

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