Comparative study of contour transtar and STARR procedure for the treatment of obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) – feasibility, morbidity and early functional results

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid


AimStapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) is a promising new treatment for obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS). It may be performed using either a double-stapling technique (PPH-STARR) or with the new Contour Transtar (CT) device. The aim of this study was to evaluate the two techniques with respect to morbidity and functional outcomes.MethodPatients presenting with ODS were evaluated using standardized clinical and radiological investigations and prospectively entered into a database. A total of 150 Patients were treated with either PPH-STARR (n = 68) or CT (n = 82) and further evaluated at 12 month postoperatively.ResultsThe mean size of the resected specimen was 27 cm2 (SD ±4.86 cm2) in the PPH-STARR group and 46 cm2 (SD ±10.6 cm2) in the CT group [P < 0.001]. Morbidity was 7.3% (n = 5) in the PPH-STARR group and 7.5% (n = 6) in the CT group. The most common complication was minor postoperative bleeding in both groups (PPH-STARR: n = 2, 2.9%; CT: n = 2, 2.4%) Overall there were no septic complications and no surgical re-interventions. There was a tendency for more postoperative pain following CT (n = 3, 3.6%) as compared with PPH-STARR (n = 1, 1.4%). Constipation Scores (CCS) were 15.50 ± 5.71 in the PPH-STARR group and 15.70 ± 5.84 in the CT group preoperatively and decreased significantly to 8.25 (SD ±1.45) and 8.01 (SD ±2.31) 12-months after surgery. Values did not differ significantly between the two groups.ConclusionsContour Transtar is as safe and effective as PPH-STARR and provides a true circumferential resection of rectal intussusception. This may benefit selected patients and result in improved long-term durability of the technique.

    loading  Loading Related Articles