Rectal Prolapse 

  • Author: Lisa Susan Poritz, MD; Chief Editor: John Geibel, MD, DSc, MA   more...
 
Updated: Apr 20, 2010
 

Background

Rectal prolapse was described as early as 1500 BC.

Next

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. 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.

Previous
Next

Epidemiology

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.

Previous
Next

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.[1]

Mucosal prolapse most likely has a different etiology and pathophysiology than full-thickness rectal prolapse and internal intussusception.[2] 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.

Previous
Next

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.

Previous
Next

Indications

The existence of rectal prolapse is an indication for surgery.

Previous
Next

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.
Previous
Next

Contraindications

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

Previous
Proceed to Workup
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Lisa Susan Poritz, MD  Associate Professor of Surgery and Cellular and Molecular Physiology, Director, Colon and Rectal Research, Department of Surgery, Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Milton S Hershey Medical Center, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine

Lisa Susan Poritz, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Physiological Society, American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Association for Academic Surgery, Association of Women Surgeons, Central Surgical Association, Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and Society of University Surgeons

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Brian James Daley, MD, MBA, FACS, FCCP, CNSC  Professor, Associate Program Director, Department of Surgery, Division of Trauma and Critical Care, University of Tennessee Health Science Center College of Medicine

Brian James Daley, MD, MBA, FACS, FCCP, CNSC 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.

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD  Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Medscape Salary Employment

David L Morris, MD, PhD, FRACS  Professor, Department of Surgery, St George Hospital, University of New South Wales, Australia

David L Morris, MD, PhD, FRACS is a member of the following medical societies: British Society of Gastroenterology

Disclosure: RFA Medical None Director; MRC Biotec None Director

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 Chair and Professor, Department of Surgery, Section of Gastrointestinal Medicine, and Department of Cellular and Molecular Physiology, Yale University School of Medicine; Director, 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 Consulting; ARdelyx Ownership interest Board membership

References
  1. Harmston C, Jones O, Cunningham C, et al. The relationship between internal rectal prolapse and internal anal sphincter function. Colorectal Dis. Mar 21 2010;[Medline].

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

  3. Kosba Y, Elshazly WG, Abd El Maksoud W. Posterior sagittal approach for mesh rectopexy as a management of complete rectal in adults. Int J Colorectal Dis. Apr 1 2010;[Medline].

  4. Gurland B, Garrett KA, Firoozi F, et al. Transvaginal sacrospinous rectopexy: initial clinical experience. Tech Coloproctol. Mar 23 2010;[Medline].

  5. 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].

  6. Hetzer FH, Roushan AH, Wolf K, et al. Functional outcome after perineal stapled prolapse resection for external rectal prolapse. BMC Surg. Mar 8 2010;10:9. [Medline].

  7. 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].

  8. 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].

  9. 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].

  10. Ismail M, Gabr K, Shalaby R. Laparoscopic management of persistent complete rectal prolapse in children. J Pediatr Surg. Mar 2010;45(3):533-9. [Medline].

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

  12. 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].

  13. 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].

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

  15. 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].

  16. 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].

  17. 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].

  18. 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].

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

  20. 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].

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

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

  23. 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].

  24. 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].

Previous
Next
 
Rectal prolapse.
Full-thickness rectal prolapse.
Marlex rectopexy.
Delorme mucosal sleeve resection.
Altemeier perineal rectosigmoidectomy.
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2012 by WebMD LLC.
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.