PURPOSE: We noted the combination of obstructed defecation or constipation
and fecal incontinence, the poor results of abdominal rectopexy for constip
ation, and the well-known risk of postoperative induction of constipation a
fter rectopexy. We developed a new operation to treat patients with constip
ation or fecal incontinence (with a concomitant rectocele, internal rectal
intussusception, enterocele at dynamic defecography, or all three) or both.
This new rectopexy technique avoided dorsolateral mobilization of the rect
um and did not endanger the hypogastric nerves and pelvic autonomic nerves.
A better effect on constipation compared with rectopexies with dorsolatera
l mobilization was expected. METHODS: The results of this new operation, wh
ich was called rectovaginopexy, were studied prospectively in a series of 2
7 patients. Four-year results were obtained. Preoperative and postoperative
questionnaires, dynamic defecograms, and anorectal physiology studies were
analyzed. RESULTS: Before the operation 17 patients were constipated, comp
ared with 4 patients one year after rectovaginopexy (76 percent improvement
; P = 0.0015) and 5 patients four years after rectovaginopexy(71 percent im
provement; P = 0.005), respectively. At one year, fecal incontinence decrea
sed significantly: 15 of 17 patients improved and 9 patients became fully c
ontinent (P = 0.0007). Four years after rectovaginopexy the effect on fecal
incontinence was no longer significant (P = 0.09). Rectovaginopexy restore
d anatomy: all (9) enteroceles, all but 1 (17) internal rectal intussuscept
ion, and 12 of 20 rectoceles dissolved, and the majority were reduced in si
ze. Rectal sensation for distention was unchanged, and rectal electrosensit
ivity improved (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Rectovaginopexy provides significan
t one-year improvement of both constipation and fecal incontinence. The pos
itive effect on constipation did not deteriorate with time, in contrast to
the effect on fecal incontinence.