Comparison between two perineal procedures for treatment of rectal prolaps | ||||
| The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine | ||||
| Article 3, Volume 4, Issue 1, July 2001, Page 27-35 PDF (304.27 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/ejhm.2001.18872 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Ahmed Mohamed Abozid; Nabila Mohamed A. Shams; Yahia Hassan Zayed; Sayid Mostafa | ||||
| Surgical department, faculty of medicine for girls, Al Azhar university | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| The optimal surgical procedures for the management of rectal prolapse is still under debate so comparison between two operations were done in our series. Eighteen patients with complete rectal prolaps were treated surgically through the perineum they were divided into two groups. First group were treated by recto-segmoidectomy and levatroplasty to fortify the pelvic floor, the second group were treated by rectopexy using prolene mesh and levetroplasty to fortify the pelvic floor, the mesh was inserted between the rectum and sacrum and fixed through perineal incision. Aim of work The aim of this work was to compare the short-term outcome of two different perineal operative procedures in patients with full thickness rectal prolaps. | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 105 PDF Download: 386 |
||||
