eMedicine Specialties > General Surgery > Colorectal

Rectal Prolapse

Author: Lisa S Poritz, MD, Assistant Professor, Department of Surgery, Section of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Milton S Hershey Medical Center, Pennsylvania State University
Contributor Information and Disclosures

Updated: Jul 22, 2009

Introduction

Rectal prolapse was described as early as 1500 BC.

Problem

Three different clinical entities are often combined and called rectal prolapse: full-thickness rectal prolapse, mucosal prolapse, and internal prolapse (internal intussusception). Treatment of these 3 entities differs.

Full-thickness rectal prolapse is the most commonly recognized type and is defined as protrusion of the full thickness of the rectal wall through the anus. This is illustrated in the images below.

Rectal prolapse.

Rectal prolapse.

Rectal prolapse.

Rectal prolapse.


Full-thickness rectal prolapse.

Full-thickness rectal prolapse.

Full-thickness rectal prolapse.

Full-thickness rectal prolapse.


In mucosal prolapse, only the rectal mucosa (not the entire wall) protrudes from the anus.

Internal intussusception may be a full thickness or a partial rectal wall disorder, but the prolapsed tissue does not pass beyond the anal canal and does not pass out of the anus. Most of this article focuses on full-thickness rectal prolapse, which will be referred to as rectal prolapse.

Frequency

Rectal prolapse is uncommon; however, the true incidence is unknown because of underreporting, especially in the elderly population. Peaks in occurrence are noted in the fourth and seventh decades of life, and most patients (80-90%) are women.

The condition is often concurrent with pelvic floor descent and prolapse of other pelvic floor organs, such as the uterus or the bladder. Although multiple pregnancies are often implicated in the etiology, 35% of patients are nulliparous. A small subset of children is affected, usually before the age of 3 years. Evaluation and treatment of children with rectal prolapse is different from that for adults and is not addressed in this article.

Etiology

The etiology of rectal prolapse is unknown, but it is often associated with long-standing constipation. Other predisposing conditions include chronic straining during defecation, pregnancy, previous surgery, and neurologic disease. The pathophysiology of rectal prolapse is also not completely understood or agreed upon.

The 2 main theories are essentially different ways of expressing the same idea.

The first theory postulates that rectal prolapse is a sliding hernia through a defect in the pelvic fascia. The second theory holds that rectal prolapse starts as a circumferential internal intussusception of the rectum beginning 6-8 cm proximal to the anal verge. With time and straining, this progresses to full-thickness rectal prolapse, although some patients never progress beyond this stage.

Certain anatomic features found during surgery for rectal prolapse are common to most patients. These features include a patulous or weak anal sphincter with levator diastasis, deep anterior Douglas cul-de-sac, poor posterior rectal fixation with a long rectal mesentery, and redundant rectosigmoid. Whether these anatomic features are the cause or result of the prolapsing rectum is not known.

Mucosal prolapse most likely has a different etiology and pathophysiology than full-thickness rectal prolapse and internal intussusception.1 Mucosal prolapse occurs when the connective tissue attachments of the rectal mucosa are loosened and stretched, thus allowing the tissue to prolapse through the anus. This often occurs as a continuation of long-standing hemorrhoidal disease and is treated as such.

Presentation

Patients with rectal prolapse report a mass protruding through the anus. Initially, the mass protrudes from the anus only after a bowel movement and usually retracts when the patient stands up. As the disease process progresses, the mass protrudes more often, especially with straining and Valsalva maneuvers such as sneezing or coughing. Finally, the rectum prolapses with daily activities such as walking and may progress to continual prolapse.

As the disease progresses, the rectum no longer spontaneously retracts, and patients may have to manually replace it. This condition may then progress to a point at which the rectum prolapses immediately after being replaced and is continuously prolapsed. Rarely, the rectum becomes incarcerated, and patients cannot re-place the rectum.

Pain is variable. Ten to 25% of patients also have uterine or bladder prolapse, and 35% may have an associated cystocele.

In addition to a protruding mass from the anus, patients often report fecal incontinence. Incontinence occurs for 2 reasons.

First, the anus is dilated and stretched by the protruding rectum, disrupting the function of the anal sphincter. Second, the mucosa of the rectum is in contact with the environment and constantly secretes mucus, thus making the patient appear to be chronically wet and incontinent.

Patients with mucosal prolapse have similar problems but not to the same degree. Patients with internal intussusception often report difficulty with defecation and a sensation of incomplete evacuation.

Rectal prolapse is a clinical diagnosis that physicians should be able to confirm in the office. The patient is asked to sit on a toilet and strain, after which the rectum should prolapse. If it does not prolapse with just straining, the administration of a phosphate enema usually produces the prolapse. In a small child, a glycerin suppository can be used instead.

The protruding mass should show concentric rings of mucosa, which are classic signs of rectal prolapse. In cases of small prolapse, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between mucosal and full-thickness rectal prolapse. Mucosal prolapse typically exhibits radial folds instead of concentric rings. If these cannot be clinically distinguished, a defecogram may be of help in differentiating these 2 conditions. A defecogram is unnecessary in the presence of an obvious rectal prolapse.

A detailed history to evaluate incontinence and/or constipation is important, as it plays a role in determining the appropriate surgical procedure.

For excellent patient education resources, visit eMedicine's Esophagus, Stomach, and Intestine Center. Also, see eMedicine's patient education article Rectal Prolapse.

Indications

The existence of rectal prolapse is an indication for surgery.

Relevant Anatomy

  • Rectum: The rectum is the distal 12-15 cm of the large intestine between the sigmoid colon and the anal canal. It primarily serves as a reservoir for fecal material.
  • Mucosa: This is the inner lining of the intestinal tract.
  • Internal anal sphincter: The internal anal sphincter is a smooth muscle that is the most distal extension of the inner circular smooth muscle of the colon and the rectum. It is 2.5-4 cm long and normally 2-3 mm thick. The internal sphincter is not under voluntary control and is continuously contracted to prevent unplanned loss of stool.
  • External anal sphincter: The external anal sphincter is striated muscle that forms a circular tube around the anal canal. Moving proximally, it merges with the puborectalis muscle and the levator ani to form a single complex. Control of the external anal sphincter is voluntary.
  • Dentate line: The dentate line is the junction of the ectoderm and endoderm in the anal canal.

Contraindications

Contraindications to surgical correction of rectal prolapse are based on the patient's comorbidities and his or her ability to tolerate surgery.

More on Rectal Prolapse

Overview: Rectal Prolapse
Workup: Rectal Prolapse
Treatment: Rectal Prolapse
Follow-up: Rectal Prolapse
Multimedia: Rectal Prolapse
References
Further Reading

References

  1. Wijffels NA, Collinson R, Cunningham C, et al. What is the natural history of internal rectal prolapse?. Colorectal Dis. Apr 13 2009;[Medline].

  2. Altomare DF, Binda G, Ganio E, et al. Long-term outcome of Altemeier's procedure for rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. Apr 2009;52(4):698-703. [Medline].

  3. Elmalik K, Dagash H, Shawis RN. Abdominal posterior rectopexy with an omental pedicle for intractable rectal prolapse: a modified technique. Pediatr Surg Int. Jun 25 2009;[Medline].

  4. de Hoog DE, Heemskerk J, Nieman FH, et al. Recurrence and functional results after open versus conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a case-control study. Int J Colorectal Dis. Jul 9 2009;[Medline].

  5. Sajid M, Siddiqui M, Baig M. Open versus laparoscopic repair of full thickness rectal prolapse: a re-meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis. Apr 13 2009;[Medline].

  6. Blatchford GJ, Perry RE, Thorson AG. Rectopexy without resection for rectal prolapse. Am J Surg. Dec 1989;158(6):574-6. [Medline].

  7. Boulos PB, Stryker SJ, Nicholls RJ. The long-term results of polyvinyl alcohol (Ivalon) sponge for rectal prolapse in young patients. Br J Surg. Mar 1984;71(3):213-4. [Medline].

  8. Cirocco WC, Brown AC. Anterior resection for the treatment of rectal prolapse: a 20-year experience. Am Surg. Apr 1993;59(4):265-9. [Medline].

  9. Johansen OB, Wexner SD, Daniel N. Perineal rectosigmoidectomy in the elderly. Dis Colon Rectum. Aug 1993;36(8):767-72. [Medline].

  10. Loygue J, Nordlinger B, Cunci O. Rectopexy to the promontory for the treatment of rectal prolapse. Report of 257 cases. Dis Colon Rectum. Jun 1984;27(6):356-9. [Medline].

  11. Luukkonen P, Mikkonen U, Jarvinen H. Abdominal rectopexy with sigmoidectomy vs. rectopexy alone for rectal prolapse: a prospective, randomized study. Int J Colorectal Dis. Dec 1992;7(4):219-22. [Medline].

  12. Madoff RD, Williams JG, Wong WD. Long-term functional results of colon resection and rectopexy for overt rectal prolapse. Am J Gastroenterol. Jan 1992;87(1):101-4. [Medline].

  13. McKee RF, Lauder JC, Poon FW. A prospective randomized study of abdominal rectopexy with and without sigmoidectomy in rectal prolapse. Surg Gynecol Obstet. Feb 1992;174(2):145-8. [Medline].

  14. Schlinkert RT, Beart RW Jr, Wolff BG. Anterior resection for complete rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. Jun 1985;28(6):409-12. [Medline].

  15. Schultz I, Mellgren A, Dolk A, et al. Continence is improved after the Ripstein rectopexy. Different mechanizms in rectal prolapse and rectal intussusception?. Dis Colon Rectum. Mar 1996;39(3):300-6. [Medline].

  16. Senapati A, Nicholls RJ, Thomson JP. Results of Delorme''s procedure for rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. May 1994;37(5):456-60. [Medline].

  17. Watts JD, Rothenberger DA, Buls JG. The management of procidentia. 30 years'' experience. Dis Colon Rectum. Feb 1985;28(2):96-102. [Medline].

  18. Williams JG, Rothenberger DA, Madoff RD. Treatment of rectal prolapse in the elderly by perineal rectosigmoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum. Sep 1992;35(9):830-4. [Medline].

  19. Yoshioka K, Heyen F, Keighley MR. Functional results after posterior abdominal rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. Oct 1989;32(10):835-8. [Medline].

Further Reading

Related eMedicine topics:
Constipation
Hemorrhoids [Emergency Medicine]
Hemorrhoids [General Surgery]
Intussusception [Pediatrics: General Medicine]
Intussusception, Child
Intussusception, Surgical Treatment
Rectal Prolapse [Emergency Medicine]
Rectal Prolapse [Pediatrics: General Medicine]
Rectal Prolapse, Surgical Treatment

Clinical guidelines:
ASGE guideline: guideline on the use of endoscopy in the management of constipation. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy - Medical Specialty Society.  2005 Aug.  3 pages.  NGC:004485

Clinical trial:
Clinical Study for the Evaluation of the Efficiency of a Device for the Diagnosis of an Internal Rectal Prolapse, a Pelvic Floor Ptosis and for the Determination of an Internal Hernia Into the Douglas Pouch

Keywords

rectal prolapse, procidentia, full-thickness rectal prolapse, mucosal prolapse, internal prolapse, internal intussusception, pelvic floor descent, constipation, rectal ulcers, hemorrhoids, hemorrhoidal disease, cystocele, fecal incontinence, defecogram, anal rectal manometry, proctosigmoidoscopy, Marlex rectopexy, Ripstein procedure, suture rectopexy, resection rectopexy, Frykman Goldberg procedure, anal encirclement, Thiersch wire, Delorme mucosal sleeve resection, Altemeier perineal rectosigmoidectomy, hemorrhoidectomy

Contributor Information and Disclosures

Author

Lisa S Poritz, MD, Assistant Professor, Department of Surgery, Section of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Milton S Hershey Medical Center, Pennsylvania State University
Lisa S Poritz, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Association for Academic Surgery, and Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Medical Editor

Brian James Daley, MD, MBA, FACS, Associate Program Director, Professor, Department of Surgery, Division of Trauma and Critical Care, University of Tennessee School of Medicine
Brian James Daley, MD, MBA, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for the Surgery of Trauma, American College of Chest Physicians, American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, Association for Academic Surgery, Association for Surgical Education, Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma, Shock Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Southeastern Surgical Congress, and Tennessee Medical Association
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Pharmacy Editor

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine
Disclosure: eMedicine Salary Employment

Managing Editor

David L Morris, MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Surgery, St George Hospital, University of New South Wales, Australia
Disclosure: RFA Medical None Director; MRC Biotec None Director

CME Editor

Paolo Zamboni, MD, Professor of Surgery, Chief of Day Surgery Unit, Chair of Vascular Diseases Center, University of Ferrara, Italy
Paolo Zamboni, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Venous Forum and New York Academy of Sciences
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

John Geibel, MD, DSc, MA, Vice Chairman, Professor, Department of Surgery, Section of Gastrointestinal Medicine and Department of Cellular and Molecular Physiology, Yale University School of Medicine; Director of Surgical Research, Department of Surgery, Yale-New Haven Hospital
John Geibel, MD, DSc, MA is a member of the following medical societies: American Gastroenterological Association, American Physiological Society, American Society of Nephrology, Association for Academic Surgery, International Society of Nephrology, New York Academy of Sciences, and Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract
Disclosure: AMGEN Royalty Other

 
 
HONcode

We subscribe to the
HONcode principles of the
Health On the Net Foundation

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright© 1994- by Medscape.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.