ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04892108Updated May 28, 2021

Rectal Prolapse With ODS. STARR vs LVR.

An interventional study of STARR (Stapled Trans Anal Rectal Resection) and LVR (Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy) in Rectal Prolapse, Defecation Disorder and Rectocele; Female, sponsored by University Hospital of Ferrara. Completed at 1 site in Italy. Open to female participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-05-28.

Sponsored by University Hospital of Ferrara · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 4 years 3 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Jan 2017, registered Apr 2021).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
70
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

The objective of the study will be to evaluate the clinical and functional outcome of patients with obstructed defecation sndrome (ODS) associated to internal rectal prolapse, treated with transanal prolassectomy (STARR) surgery compared to those treated with laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR).

Read the detailed description

This randomized controlled trial (single center, prospective, randomized controlled, parallel, and single-blind trial) is designed to compare the outcome of patients with ODS and rectal prolapse undergoing transanal prolapsectomy with mechanical stapler (STARR) versus laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (LVR), with the aim of evaluating the most appropriate surgical choice.

The study will be conducted at the Surgical Unit 2 of the University Hospital of Ferrara, Italy. Patients suffering from rectal prolapse and ODS that will refer to the colorectal and pelvic floor clinic of the University Hospital Ferrara, and eligible for surgery, will be evaluated consecutively after expressing consent to participate in the study by signing an informed consent.

The duration of the study for each patient will be expected to be 48 months with follow-up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months postoperatively.

Eligible patients will receive information about participating in the trial by their surgeon. Consecutive eligible patients will be randomly assigned to one of two groups with a 1:1 equal allocation ratio.

Patients eligible for the study will be randomized on a 1:1 basis to undergo transanal prolassectomy (Group 1: STARR) or laparoscopic ventral rectopexy with mesh placement (Group 2: LVR).

An independent individual will perform randomization using a software randomization program. Randomization will be performed by a randomized list. The assignment sequence will be generated from a random numerical series generated through a computerized list. Randomization will be in blocks of 4. Group assignments will be unknown to those responsible for data collection and those who will be responsible for statistical analysis and clinical evaluation of patients.

The diagnosis of ODS will be attributed after clinical evaluation at the colorectal clinic and on the basis of the presence of one or more symptoms associated with this disorder, such as to reach a score of 14 and above according to the validated score of ODS of Altomare.

Assessment After recruitment and consent, all patients under study will be asked and collected demographic and clinical information with comorbidities (in particular diabetes, fibromyalgia, depressive disorders, neurological diseases, COPD), parity, previous pelvic surgery, type of surgery, time of hospitalization and any complications (according to Clavien-Dindo classification).

Data concerning the grade of rectoanal prolapse, according with Oxford Classification [20], and rectocele grading will be collected through outpatient proctological evaluation associated with proctoscopy, rectal manometry, and Rx defecography. Colonoscopy will be also performed in every patient to exclude colorectal cancer.

The severity of the ODS will be scored with the Altomare's ODS scoring system. Constipation and fecal incontinence will be measured by obtaining their scores through the administration of validated questionnaires such as the Wexner Constipation score, and the Cleveland Clinic Fecal Incontinence Score (CCFI).

Quality of life will be also evaluated by the patient assessment of constipation quality-of-life (PAC-Qol) questionnaire. The study of eventually associated pelvic distress will be assessed by administering validated questionnaires such as the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-score, short form) and the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFQI-score, short form).

The scores obtained, as well as the presence of symptoms (fecal incontinence, constipation, or ODS) will be calculated before and after surgery (at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months). All patients will be followed up on an outpatient basis at 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 ,24, 36, and 48 months after surgery. Rectal manometry and defecography will be performed after 12 months after surgery.

Surgical intervention All the procedures will be performed by a single surgeon (SA). The LVR technique used for this protocol is as previously described. Subjects randomized to this arm will receive a standard LVR. Briefly, the peritoneum is opened over the right side of the sacral promontory. The mesorectum is dissected and extended in an inverted J-form along the right side. The rectovaginal septum is opened to the pelvic floor. Biologic mesh (Permacol) is sutured to the ventral aspect of the rectum with non-readsorbable stitches. The proximal end of the mesh is fixed on the anterior longitudinal ligament at sacral promontory with nonabsorbable tacks. The incised peritoneum is then closed to over the mesh.

Subjects randomized to STARR arm will undergo a STARR procedure. Briefly, a circular anal dilator is introduced into the rectum. The purse-string anoscope is used to complete the anterior hemi-circumference purse-string suture, about 2-3 cm above the haemorrhoidal apex. A 33-mm circular stapler (Ethicon, ppH01) is opened, inserted until crossing the purse-string which is then tied with a knot. Then the stapler is closed and fired. The same hemi-circumference purse-string suture is performed in the posterior rectal wall. A second application of the stapler on the posterior wall is inserted, closed and fired.

The duration of the study will be 2 years. The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of Helsinki Declaration, with approval of the medical ethics review board of S. Anna University Hospital. A written informed consent will be obtained from all enrolled patients.

The report will comply with the strengthening the reporting of randomized studies (CONSORT).

02

Conditions studied

  • Rectal Prolapse
  • Defecation Disorder
  • Rectocele; Female
  • Surgery

Keywords

  • Obstructed defecation syndrome
  • Transanal rectal prolassectomy
  • Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy
03

In context

Rectal Prolapse

55 studies on the registry are indexed under Rectal Prolapse; 12 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 70 is above the median of 55 across 34 interventional studies indexed under Rectal Prolapse.

Browse Rectal Prolapse studies →

Lead sponsor

University Hospital of Ferrara is the lead sponsor of 114 studies on the registry; 28 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • female gender,
  • the presence of rectorectal or rectoanal intussusception as main cause of ODS, confirmed by defecography,
  • type of operation performed (STARR or LVR),
  • ODS score > 14 [17]
  • PACQoL >32 [18]
  • ODS symptoms for at least 12 months prior to enrollment
  • Failure of at least 6 months of medical therapy

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • male gender,
  • severe fecal incontinence (CCS score>6, Maximum Resting Pressure at rectal manometry \< 50 mmHg),
  • combined procedures
  • previous surgery on rectum or anus for cancer or rectal prolapse, inflammatory bowel disease, other type of surgery to relieve ODS
  • pregnancy,
  • anismus or dissinergic defecation
  • full-thickness prolapse
  • stress urinary incontinence associated
  • histerocele or cystocele associated (since we usually correct both defects in the same surgical procedure)
  • prior pelvic radiotherapy
  • slow transit constipation defined as ≤ 2 bowel movements per week,
  • any psychiatric diseases.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
70 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Group STARR

    Patients undergoing transanal prolassectomy with mechanical stapler (STARR: Stapled Trans Anal Rectal Resection) randomly

    Procedure: STARR (Stapled Trans Anal Rectal Resection)

  • Experimental
    Group LVR

    Patients undergoing Laparoscopic suspensory correction of rectal prolapse by ventral rectopexy with biological prosthesis (LVR) randomly

    Procedure: LVR (Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy)

Interventions

  • ProcedureSTARR (Stapled Trans Anal Rectal Resection)

    Patients randomly assigned to surgical intervention of STARR (Stapled Trans Anal Rectal Resection)

  • ProcedureLVR (Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy)

    Patients randomly assigned to surgical intervention of LVR (Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy)

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Evaluation of different outcomes in relief from ODS after surgery in both groups

    In order to evaluate the short- and long-term efficacy of STARR procedure compared to LVR, the percentage of changes in total ODS, PAC-QoL, PFDI, PFQI, Wexner Constipation, the Cleveland Clinic Fecal Incontinence (CCFI) scores between baseline and 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months after surgery, were adopted as primary outcome.

    Time frame: 4 years

Secondary outcomes

  1. short-term postoperative complications (within 30 days after surgery)

    short-term postoperative complications (within 30 days after surgery) in the two groups (according to Clavien-Dindo classification)

    Time frame: 4 years

  2. long-term postoperative complications

    Mesh-related complications, rectal stenosis

    Time frame: 4 years

  3. recurrence or persistence of rectal prolapse

    to evaluate recurrence or persistence of rectal prolapse (diagnosed clinically and by postoperative defecography) in both groups, and the need for subsequent corrective surgery

    Time frame: 4 years

  4. recurrence or persistence of ODS (Obstructed defecation syndrome)

    recurrence or persistence of ODS if ODS score \> 10

    Time frame: 4 years

  5. patient satisfaction in terms of pain

    patient satisfaction measured by a VAS (Visual Analogue Scale: evaluation of pain in mm: from 0 to 4 mm: no pain; from 5 to 44 mm: little pain; from 45 to 74 mm: moderate pain; from 75 to 100 mm: severe pain

    Time frame: 4 years

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Surgery 2 Surgical Department, Sant'Anna University Hospital Ferrara, Italy
    Ferrara, 44124, Italy
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Hicks CW, Weinstein M, Wakamatsu M, Savitt L, Pulliam S, Bordeianou L. In patients with rectoceles and obstructed defecation syndrome, surgery should be the option of last resort. Surgery. 2014 Apr;155(4):659-67. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2013.11.013. Epub 2013 Dec 5. PubMed 24508117 ↗
  • Khaikin M, Wexner SD. Treatment strategies in obstructed defecation and fecal incontinence. World J Gastroenterol. 2006 May 28;12(20):3168-73. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i20.3168. PubMed 16718835 ↗
  • Rao SS. Dyssynergic defecation. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2001 Mar;30(1):97-114. doi: 10.1016/s0889-8553(05)70169-2. PubMed 11394039 ↗
  • Podzemny V, Pescatori LC, Pescatori M. Management of obstructed defecation. World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jan 28;21(4):1053-60. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i4.1053. PubMed 25632177 ↗
  • Gunner CK, Senapati A, Northover JM, Brown SR. Life after PROSPER. What do people do for external rectal prolapse? Colorectal Dis. 2016 Aug;18(8):811-4. doi: 10.1111/codi.13255. PubMed 27481719 ↗
  • Senapati A, Gray RG, Middleton LJ, Harding J, Hills RK, Armitage NC, Buckley L, Northover JM; PROSPER Collaborative Group. PROSPER: a randomised comparison of surgical treatments for rectal prolapse. Colorectal Dis. 2013 Jul;15(7):858-68. doi: 10.1111/codi.12177. PubMed 23461778 ↗
  • Emile SH, Elfeki H, Shalaby M, Sakr A, Sileri P, Wexner SD. Perineal resectional procedures for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse: A systematic review of the literature. Int J Surg. 2017 Oct;46:146-154. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.09.005. Epub 2017 Sep 7. PubMed 28890414 ↗
  • van den Esschert JW, van Geloven AA, Vermulst N, Groenedijk AG, de Wit LT, Gerhards MF. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for obstructed defecation syndrome. Surg Endosc. 2008 Dec;22(12):2728-32. doi: 10.1007/s00464-008-9771-9. Epub 2008 Mar 5. Erratum In: Surg Endosc. 2008 Oct;22(10):2330. Groenedijk, A [corrected to Groenedijk, A G]. PubMed 18320283 ↗
  • Altomare DF, Spazzafumo L, Rinaldi M, Dodi G, Ghiselli R, Piloni V. Set-up and statistical validation of a new scoring system for obstructed defaecation syndrome. Colorectal Dis. 2008 Jan;10(1):84-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01262.x. Epub 2007 Apr 18. PubMed 17441968 ↗
  • Marquis P, De La Loge C, Dubois D, McDermott A, Chassany O. Development and validation of the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life questionnaire. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2005 May;40(5):540-51. doi: 10.1080/00365520510012208. PubMed 16036506 ↗
  • Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, de Santibanes E, Pekolj J, Slankamenac K, Bassi C, Graf R, Vonlanthen R, Padbury R, Cameron JL, Makuuchi M. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009 Aug;250(2):187-96. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2. PubMed 19638912 ↗
  • Cariou de Vergie L, Venara A, Duchalais E, Frampas E, Lehur PA. Internal rectal prolapse: Definition, assessment and management in 2016. J Visc Surg. 2017 Feb;154(1):21-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2016.10.004. Epub 2016 Nov 16. PubMed 27865742 ↗
  • Kluivers KB, Hendriks JC, Shek C, Dietz HP. Pelvic organ prolapse symptoms in relation to POPQ, ordinal stages and ultrasound prolapse assessment. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008 Sep;19(9):1299-302. doi: 10.1007/s00192-008-0634-7. Epub 2008 May 9. PubMed 18465076 ↗
  • Agachan F, Chen T, Pfeifer J, Reissman P, Wexner SD. A constipation scoring system to simplify evaluation and management of constipated patients. Dis Colon Rectum. 1996 Jun;39(6):681-5. doi: 10.1007/BF02056950. PubMed 8646957 ↗
  • Vaizey CJ, Carapeti E, Cahill JA, Kamm MA. Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems. Gut. 1999 Jan;44(1):77-80. doi: 10.1136/gut.44.1.77. PubMed 9862829 ↗
  • Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jul;193(1):103-13. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.025. PubMed 16021067 ↗
  • Barber MD, Chen Z, Lukacz E, Markland A, Wai C, Brubaker L, Nygaard I, Weidner A, Janz NK, Spino C. Further validation of the short form versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ). Neurourol Urodyn. 2011 Apr;30(4):541-6. doi: 10.1002/nau.20934. Epub 2011 Feb 22. PubMed 21344495 ↗
  • Sileri P, Franceschilli L, de Luca E, Lazzaro S, Angelucci GP, Fiaschetti V, Pasecenic C, Gaspari AL. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for internal rectal prolapse using biological mesh: postoperative and short-term functional results. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Mar;16(3):622-8. doi: 10.1007/s11605-011-1793-2. Epub 2012 Jan 7. PubMed 22228202 ↗
  • Jayne DG, Schwandner O, Stuto A. Stapled transanal rectal resection for obstructed defecation syndrome: one-year results of the European STARR Registry. Dis Colon Rectum. 2009 Jul;52(7):1205-12; discussion 1212-4. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181a9120f. PubMed 19571694 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Jan 2017 to primary completion in Jan 2019, 24 months.

Of 18 interventional studies with no phase under Rectal Prolapse, half reached primary completion within 58 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 21 and three quarters within 94. This study's 24 months is below that.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Apr 11, 2021
First posted
May 19, 2021
StartActual
Jan 1, 2017
Primary completionActual
Jan 1, 2019
CompletionActual
Mar 1, 2021
Last update
May 28, 2021
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 28, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04892108
Responsible party
Simona Ascanelli (Principal Investigator, University Hospital of Ferrara) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 19, 2021
Start date
Jan 1, 2017
Primary completion
Jan 1, 2019
Completion
Mar 1, 2021
Last update
May 28, 2021

Study contacts

Simona Ascanelli
principal investigator · Surgical Department University Hospital Ferrara Italy

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in May 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion