Recurrence after Delorme’s procedure in a single and multi-surgeon setting
Background: Delorme’s procedure (DP) is a perineal repair reserved for full-thickness rectal prolapse (FTRP) in elderly/comorbid patients due to its low perioperative morbidity. Reported recurrence rates are higher than for abdominal approaches. This study reports the long-term clinical outcomes of recurrence and postoperative bowel function after DP.
Methods: A retrospective cohort study including all patients who underwent a DP for FTRP between February 2001 and March 2014 at two primary study sites: Groote Schuur Hospital (multi-surgeon) and Kingsbury Hospital (singlesurgeon). Primary outcome was the absence of recurrence of FTRP after DP. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and morbidity, postoperative bowel function and length of hospital stay.
Results: 70 patients underwent DP: 37 were operated on by the single surgeon and 33 by multiple surgeons. The median age was 76 years (IQR 20 years). Median length of follow-up was 46 months (IQR 55 months). 16 recurrences occurred: 7 in the single-surgeon cohort and 9 in the multi-surgeon cohort (p = 0.4). Median time to recurrence was 23 months (IQR 36 months): 48 months in the single-surgeon cohort and 15 months in the multi-surgeon cohort (p = 0.6). Six patients each had minor and major complications. Three patients died postoperatively. 8 patients required reoperation. Median postoperative hospital stay was three days (IQR 2 days). There were no significant differences between the multi-surgeon and single-surgeon cohorts.
Conclusion: Long-term follow-up demonstrates a recurrence rate of 23% after DP, with no difference between an experienced colorectal specialist and supervised trainee surgeons.
The South African Journal of Surgery (SAJS) reserves copyright of the material published. The work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Works 4.0 South Africa License. Material submitted for publication in the SAJS is accepted provided it has not been published elsewhere. The SAJS does not hold itself responsible for statements made by the authors.