Randomized, Controlled Trial of Anal Electrical Stimulation for Fecal Incontinence

Purpose Anal electric stimulation has been described as effective for fecal incontinence in several case series, but no study has addressed possible mechanism of benefit. We wished to examine whether anal electric stimulation, using an anal probe electrode, used on a daily basis at home for eight weeks, in the absence of any adjunctive exercises or advice, would improve symptoms of fecal incontinence and anal sphincter pressures when compared with “sham” electric stimulation. Methods Ninety patients (9 males, 81 females), with median age of 55 (range, 30–77) years were randomized, 47 to active anal stimulation at 35 Hz and 43 to “sham” stimulation at 1 Hz. Outcome measures included a one-week bowel diary, symptom questionnaire, manometry, and patients' evaluation of outcome. Results Seventy patients completed the study. On an intention-to-treat analysis, there was no difference between the two groups on any of the outcome measures after eight weeks. Of those who completed stimulation, 44 (63 percent) felt the stimulation had improved their continence. Those with intact anal sphincters were not likely to rate their change more positively than those with sphincter disruption (P = 0.71). Median patient rating of bowel control increased from 3 of 10 before stimulation to 5 of 10 after stimulation (P = 0.001). Conclusions Eight weeks of anal electric stimulation was rated by patients as having improved their bowel control to a modest extent. There was no statistically significant difference detected between the groups, suggesting that 1 Hz was as effective as 35 Hz. This raises the possibility that the main effect is not sphincter contraction but sensitization of the patient to the anal area, or simply the effect of intervening per se. Home electric stimulation is a relatively cheap and generally well-tolerated therapy in the conservative treatment of fecal incontinence. Supported by Action Medical Research, a medical research charity. The charity had no role in design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, nor in the decision to submit for publication. Presented at the Royal College of Nursing Gastroenterology Forum Annual Conference, Telford, United Kingdom, November 18 to 19, 2004. Work was conducted at St Mark's Hospital, Harrow, United Kingdom. Reprints are not available.     

Long-Term Study on the Effects of Visual Biofeedback and Muscle Training as a Therapeutic Modality in Pelvic Floor Dyssynergia and Slow-Transit Constipation

PURPOSE: Biofeedback training has been shown as an effective therapeutic measure in patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia, at least in the short term. Long-term effects have received less attention. Moreover, its effects in patients with slow-transit constipation have been scarcely investigated. This study was designed to assess in an objective way the medium- and long-term effects of biofeedback and muscle training in patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia and slow-transit constipation. METHODS: Twenty-four patients (14 with pelvic floor dyssynergia and 10 with slow transit) meeting the Rome II criteria for constipation, and unresponsive to conventional treatments, entered the study. Clinical evaluation and anorectal manometry were performed basally and three months after a cycle of electromyographic biofeedback and muscle training; moreover, a clinical interview was obtained one year after biofeedback. Patients with slow-transit constipation also had colonic transit time reassessed at one year. RESULTS: Clinical variables (abdominal pain, straining, number of evacuations/week, use of laxatives) all significantly improved in both groups at three-month assessment; anorectal manometric variables remained unchanged, apart from a significant decrease of sensation threshold in the pelvic floor dyssynergia group and of the maximum rectal tolerable volume in the slow-transit constipation group. At one-year control, 50 percent of patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia still maintained a beneficial effect from biofeedback, whereas only 20 percent of those complaining of slow-transit constipation did so. Moreover, the latter displayed no improvement in colonic transit time. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia are likely to have continued benefit from biofeedback training in the time course, whereas its effects on slow-transit constipation seems to be maximal in the short-term course.     

The Efficacy of Biofeedback Treatment in Patients with Fecal Incontinence

Background: The initial treatment for fecal incontinence (FI) includes supportive treatment and medical treatment. If the initial treatment fails, biofeedback therapy (BFT) is recommended. However, there are limited and conflicting results in the literature supporting the beneficial effect of BFT for FI. The aim of the study is to analyze the efficacy of BFT in 126 patients who have FI due to several causes.Methods: The data of 126 patients (88 females (69.8%) and 38 males (30.2%)) were collected retrospectively. Colonoscopy, anorectal manometry (ARM), and 3D-Endoanal ultrasonography (EAUS) were performed for all patients before applying BFT. In addition, all patients received toilet training instruction and training in Kegel and other pelvic floor strengthening exercises from an experienced nurse, before BFT.Results: The median age of participants was 54 years (range 18-75 years). While 80 patients (63.5%) had clinical and manometric benefit from BFT, 46 patients (36.5%) did not respond to BFT. According to the EAUS and ARM findings, BFT was beneficial in patients who had partial external sphincter failure, and was unsuccessful in patients who had both internal and external sphincter failure, both internal and external sphincter tears, and external sphincter tear rates of more than 25%. After BFT, significant increases in squeeze pressures were observed, with this increase being higher in the positive-response group.Conclusion: The results suggest that BFT is effective in the treatment of FI for specific patient populations.     

Innovations in Fecal Incontinence: Sacral Nerve Stimulation

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to present an overview of sacral nerve stimulation in the treatment of fecal incontinence. We describe the evolution in technique, patient selection, and indications, and review results and complications.METHODS All articles on sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence that were recovered on MEDLINE search were reviewed. With multiple articles from an institution, the most recent reports with the longest follow-up and largest cohort of patients were selected, unless information from earlier reports was relevant.RESULTS The technique of sacral stimulation is well established, carries little risk, and continues to be refined (e.g., a less invasive approach has been proposed). Patient selection is based on a two-stage diagnostic test stimulation (acute and subchronic), for which the predictive value is high. On this basis, permanent sacral nerve stimulation has proved effective in both single-center and multicenter trials in patients with a functional deficit but limited morphologic lesions or no morphologic lesions. The clinical benefit derives from multiple symptomatic improvements contributing to better bowel control and from substantially improved quality of life. The underlying mechanism of action remains undefined, but both somatic and autonomic function appears affected.CONCLUSION Sacral nerve stimulation offers a safe treatment mode in a patient population in whom conservative treatment has failed and traditional surgical approaches would have limited success. The high predictive value of the diagnostic approach offers a unique therapeutic advantage.Presented in part at the International Colorectal Disease Symposium, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, February 13 to 15, 2003.     

Sacral Nerve Stimulation in Fecal Incontinence

PURPOSE: The effect of sacral nerve stimulation was studied in 45 patients with fecal incontinence.METHODS: All patients were initially tested in general anesthesia. Sacral nerves 2, 3, and 4 were tested on both sides. If a perineal/perianal muscular response to sacral nerve stimulation could be obtained, electrodes were implanted for a three-week test-stimulation period. If sacral nerve stimulation resulted in at least a 50 percent reduction in incontinence episodes during the test period, a system for permanent sacral nerve stimulation was implanted.RESULTS: When tested in general anesthesia, 43 of 45 patients had a muscular response to sacral nerve stimulation and had electrodes implanted for the three-week test period. Percutaneous electrodes were used in 34 patients, and 23 of these had at least a 50 percent reduction in incontinence episodes, whereas the electrodes dislocated in 7 patients and 4 had a poor response. Permanent electrodes with percutaneous extension electrodes were used primarily in 9 patients and after dislocation of percutaneous electrodes in an additional 6 patients; 14 of these had a good result. In the last patient, no clinical response to stimulation with the permanent electrode could be obtained. A permanent stimulation system was implanted in 37 patients. After a median of six (range, 0–36) months follow-up, five patients had the system explanted: three because the clinical response faded out, and two because of infection. Incontinence score (Wexner, 0–20) for the 37 patients with a permanent system for sacral nerve stimulation was reduced from median 16 (range, 9–20) before sacral nerve stimulation to median 6 (range, 0–20) at latest follow-up (P < 0.0001). There was no differences in effect of sacral nerve stimulation in patients with idiopathic incontinence (n = 19) compared with spinal etiology (n = 8) or obstetric cause of incontinence (n = 5). Sacral nerve stimulation did not influence anal pressures or rectal volume tolerability.CONCLUSIONS: Sacral nerve stimulation in fecal incontinence shows promising results. Patients with idiopathic, spinal etiology, or persisting incontinence after sphincter repair may benefit from this minimally invasive treatment.Presented at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, New Orleans, Louisiana, June 21 to 26, 2003.Reprints are not available.     

Sacral Nerve Stimulation for Fecal Incontinence Following Surgery for Rectal Prolapse Repair: A Multicenter Study

PURPOSE: A proportion of patients have fecal incontinence secondary to a full-thickness rectal prolapse that fails to resolve following prolapse repair. This multicenter, prospective study assessed the use of sacral nerve stimulation for this indication. METHODS: Patients had to have more than or equal to four days with fecal incontinence per 21-day period more than one year after surgery. They had to have failed conservative treatment and have an intact external anal sphincter. RESULTS: Four female patients aged 42, 54, 68, and 65 years met the inclusion criteria. Three of the four patients had had more than one operation for recurrent full-thickness rectal prolapse before sacral nerve stimulation, one of whom had undergone a further operation for recurrence following stimulation. One patient had undergone one operation for prolapse repair. The preoperative duration of symptoms was ten, eight, three, and nine years, respectively. Although patients had an intact external anal sphincter, one patient had a fragmented internal anal sphincter. The frequency of fecal incontinent episodes changed from 11, 24.7, 5, and 8 per week at baseline to 0, 1.5, 5.5, and 1 per week at latest follow-up. Ability to defer defecation was also improved in two of three patients who had this documented. Fecal incontinence-specific quality of life assessment showed an improvement in all four domains. CONCLUSION: Sacral nerve stimulation should be considered for patients with ongoing fecal incontinence following full-thickness rectal prolapse repair if they prove resistant to conservative treatment.     

Biofeedback for Fecal Incontinence: Short-Term Outcomes of 513 Consecutive Patients and Predictors of Successful Treatment

Purpose Biofeedback is well established as a treatment for fecal incontinence but little is known about factors that may be associated with its effectiveness. This study assessed short-term outcomes, predictors of patients who completed treatment, and predictors of treatment success. Methods This study was a retrospective review of consecutive patients treated with biofeedback at a tertiary referral colorectal clinic during ten years. Clinical, physiologic, and quality of life measures were collected prospectively at the time of treatment. Regression analysis was performed. Results Of 513 patients, 385 (75 percent) completed the treatment program. Each outcome was improved for more than 70 percent of patients. Incontinence scores decreased by 32 percent (from 7.5 to 5.2 of 13), patient assessment of continence increased by 40 percent (from 5.3 to 3.2 of 10), quality of life improved by 89 percent (from 0.34 to 0.67 of 1.0), and maximum anal sphincter pressure increased by a mean 12 mmHg (14 percent; from 90 to 102 mmHg). Patients who did not complete treatment were younger, were more likely to be male, and had less severe incontinence. Treatment success was predicted by completion of all treatment sessions (odds ratio, 10.34; 95 percent confidence interval, 4.46–24.19), female gender (odds ratio, 4.11; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.04–7.5), older age (odds ratio, 1.02 per year; 95 percent confidence interval, 1–1.04), and more severe incontinence before treatment (odds ratio, 1.19 per unit increase in St. Mark’s score; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.05–1.34). Conclusions More than 70 percent of patients in this large series demonstrated improved short-term outcomes. Treatment success was more likely in those who completed six training sessions, were female, older, or had more severe incontinence. Patients were less likely to complete treatment if they were male, younger, or had milder incontinence. Dr. Byrne was supported by the Notaras Fellowship from the University of Sydney, the Scientific Foundation of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, and the training board of the Colorectal Society of Australasia. Presented at the Tripartite Colorectal Meeting, Dublin, Ireland, July 5 to 7, 2005. Reprints are not available.     

Sacral Nerve Stimulation is more Effective than Optimal Medical Therapy for Severe Fecal Incontinence: A Randomized,Controlled Study

Purpose This randomized study was designed to compare the effect of sacral neuromodulation with optimal medical therapy in patients with severe fecal incontinence. Methods Patients (aged 39–86 years) with severe fecal incontinence were randomized to have sacral nerve stimulation (SNS group; n = 60) or best supportive therapy (control; n = 60), which consisted of pelvic floor exercises, bulking agent, and dietary manipulation. Full assessment included endoanal ultrasound, anorectal physiology, two-week bowel diary, and fecal incontinence quality of life index. The follow-up duration was 12 months. Results The sacral nerve stimulation group was similar to the control group with regard to gender (F:M = 11:1 vs. 14:1) and age (mean, 63.9 vs. 63 years). The incidence of a defect of ≤ 120° of the external anal sphincter and pudendal neuropathy was similar between the groups. Trial screening improved incontinent episodes by more than 50 percent in 54 patients (90 percent). Full-stage sacral nerve stimulation was performed in 53 of these 54 “successful” patients. There were no septic complications. With sacral nerve stimulation, mean incontinent episodes per week decreased from 9.5 to 3.1 (P < 0.0001) and mean incontinent days per week from 3.3 to 1 (P < 0.0001). Perfect continence was accomplished in 25 patients (47.2 percent). In the sacral nerve stimulation group, there was a significant (P < 0.0001) improvement in fecal incontinence quality of life index in all four domains. By contrast, there was no significant improvement in fecal continence and the fecal incontinence quality of life scores in the control group. Conclusions Sacral neuromodulation significantly improved the outcome in patients with severe fecal incontinence compared with the control group undergoing optimal medical therapy. *Deceased. Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, St. Louis, Missouri, June 2 to 6, 2007.     

One-Year Follow-Up Study on the Effects of Electrogalvanic Stimulation in Chronic Idiopathic Constipation With Pelvic Floor Dyssynergia

BACKGROUND Constipation is a commonly reported symptom, and pelvic floor dyssynergia is frequently documented in constipated patients. The standard therapeutic approach for pelvic floor dyssynergia is biofeedback training, but long-term studies show that a significant percentage of patients remain symptomatic. Alternative or adjunctive therapeutic options are needed.AIMS The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of electrogalvanic stimulation in patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia and severe constipation, to see whether this treatment may be of some benefit.PATIENTS AND METHODS Thirty consecutive constipated patients with clinical and instrumental evidence of pelvic floor dyssynergia entered the study and were treated with a standard high-frequency galvanic electrostimulation protocol. Clinical and instrumental (colon transit time, anorectal manometry, defecography, rectal balloon expulsion) assessment evaluations were performed basally and one year after the treatment.RESULTS Overall, approximately 50 percent of patients showed significant improvement after electrogalvanic treatment, from both a clinical and an instrumental point of view, as shown by the objective measurements obtained through manometry, defecography, and the balloon expulsion test. The benefit was limited to normal transit constipation patients.CONCLUSIONS Because of the relatively simple, painless and effective nature of electrogalvanic stimulation, we concluded that it may represent a useful adjunct to the therapeutic armamentarium for pelvic floor dyssynergia in normal transit constipation.Presented at the IX Italian National Meeting of Digestive Diseases, Florence, Italy, February 23 to 25, 2003.     

Can the outcome of pelvic-floor rehabilitation in patients with fecal incontinence be predicted?

Purpose Pelvic-floor rehabilitation does not provide the same degree of relief in all fecal incontinent patients. We aimed at studying prospectively the ability of tests to predict the outcome of pelvic-floor rehabilitation in patients with fecal incontinence. Materials and methods Two hundred fifty consecutive patients (228 women) underwent medical history and a standardized series of tests, including physical examination, anal manometry, pudendal nerve latency testing, anal sensitivity testing, rectal capacity measurement, defecography, endoanal sonography, and endoanal magnetic resonance imaging. Subsequently, patients were referred for pelvic-floor rehabilitation. Outcome of pelvic-floor rehabilitation was quantified by the Vaizey incontinence score. Linear regression analyses were used to identify candidate predictors and to construct a multivariable prediction model for the posttreatment Vaizey score. Results After pelvic-floor rehabilitation, the mean baseline Vaizey score (18, SD ± 3) was reduced with 3.2 points (p < 0.001). In addition to the baseline Vaizey score, three elements from medical history were significantly associated with the posttreatment Vaizey score (presence of passive incontinence, thin stool consistency, primary repair of a rupture after vaginal delivery at childbed) (R ², 0.18). The predictive value was significantly but marginally improved by adding the following test results: perineal and/or perianal scar tissue (physical examination), and maximal squeeze pressure (anal manometry; R ², 0.20; p = 0.05). Conclusion Additional tests have a limited role in predicting success of pelvic-floor rehabilitation in patients with fecal incontinence.     

Electrophysiologic Studies and Clinical Findings in Females With Combined Fecal and Urinary Incontinence: A Prospective Study

Purpose Several clinical, urodynamic, and manometric findings suggest neurologic damage as a contributing factor in the development of combined fecal and urinary incontinence. In this study, we wanted to test the hypothesis of pudendal nerve neuropathy being a more frequent lesion in patients with double incontinence compared with patients with isolated fecal incontinence. Patients Ninety-three females with combined fecal and urinary incontinence and 36 females with isolated fecal incontinence were investigated. All patients underwent anal manometry, endoanal ultrasound, electromyography, and pudendal nerve terminal motor latency. Results No statistically significant differences were found in the age, history of vaginal delivery, and chronic straining between both groups. However, the rate of postmenopausal females was higher in the combined fecal and urinary incontinence group (85 vs. 67 percent; P = 0.02). Menopause was an independent risk factor of having double incontinence (odds ratio, 1.4; P = 0.02). Concentric needle electromyography of the external anal sphincter revealed increased duration of the motor unit potentials in 43 and 53 percent of patients with combined fecal and urinary incontinence and isolated fecal incontinence, respectively (P = 0.28). An increased number of polyphasic motor unit potentials was detected in 52 and 58 percent (P = 0.6). There was no statistically significant difference in the prevalence of bilateral (20 vs. 27 percent) or unilateral (23 vs. 14 percent) prolonged mean pudendal nerve terminal motor latency between both groups (P = 0.3). Conclusions Pudendal neuropathy is not a distinct characteristic of patients with double incontinence. The prevalence of pudendal neuropathy in these patients is similar to that observed in patients with isolated fecal incontinence. Others factors should be investigated to explain the common association of both types of incontinence. Presented at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, April 30 to May 5, 2005, and the International Symposium Neurogastroenterology and Motility, Toulouse, France, July 3 to 6, 2005. Reprints are not available.     

Relationship Between External Anal Sphincter Atrophy at Endoanal Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical, Functional, and Anatomic Characteristics in Patients With Fecal Incontinence

Purpose External anal sphincter atrophy at endoanal magnetic resonance imaging has been associated with poor outcome of anal sphincter repair. We studied the relationship between external anal sphincter atrophy on endoanal magnetic resonance imaging and clinical, functional, and anatomic characteristics in patients with fecal incontinence. Methods In 200 patients (mean Vaizey score, 18 (±2.9 standard deviation)) magnetic resonance images were evaluated for external anal sphincter atrophy (none, mild, or severe) by radiologists blinded to anorectal functional test results and details from medical history. Subgroups of patients with and without atrophy were compared for medical history, anal manometry, pudendal nerve latency testing, anal sensitivity testing, external anal sphincter thickness, and external anal sphincter defects. Whenever significant differences were detected, we tested for differences between patients with mild and severe atrophy. Results External anal sphincter atrophy was demonstrated in 123 patients (62 percent): graded as mild in 79 (40 percent), and severe in 44 patients (22 percent). Patients with atrophy were more often female (P < 0.001) and older (P = 0.003). They had a lower maximal squeeze (P = 0.01) and squeeze increment pressure (P < 0.001). Patients with severe atrophy had a lower maximal squeeze (P = 0.003) and squeeze increment pressure (P < 0.001) than patients with mild atrophy. These effects were not attenuated by potential confounding variables. Patients with atrophy could not be identified a priori by other characteristics. Conclusions External anal sphincter atrophy at endoanal magnetic resonance imaging was depicted in 62 percent of patients, varying from mild to severe. Because increasing levels of atrophy were associated with impaired squeeze function, further studies are needed to evaluate whether grading atrophy is clinically valuable in selecting patients for anal sphincter repair. Supported by grant 945-01-013 of the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development. Presented in part at the scientific assembly and meeting of the Radiologic Society of North America, Chicago, Illinois, November 27 to December 2, 2005. Reprints are not available.     

Telephone vs. Face-to-Face Biofeedback for Fecal Incontinence: Comparison of Two Techniques in 239 Patients

PURPOSE Biofeedback is an effective treatment for patients with fecal incontinence, yet little is known about how it works or the minimum regime necessary to provide clinical benefit. This study compares the effectiveness of a novel protocol of telephone-assisted biofeedback treatment for patients living in rural and remote areas with the standard face-to-face protocol for patients with fecal incontinence. METHODS A new treatment program comprising an initial face-to-face assessment and treatment with transanal manometry and ultrasound biofeedback, followed by three treatments conducted via telephone and a final face-to-face assessment, was developed. Standard treatment involved five face-to-face treatment sessions with manometry and ultrasound. Patients from rural areas were offered the telephone-assisted treatment protocol. Data gathered prospectively included incontinence scores, a quality of life index, anal manometry, and external sphincter isometric and isotonic fatigue times. RESULTS A total of 239 consecutive patients treated between July 2001 and July 2004 were enrolled. There were no significant differences in demographic details, past history, or pretreatment measures of the two groups. Forty-six of 55 patients (84 percent) treated with the telephone protocol and 129 of 184 (70 percent) treated by the standard technique completed treatment. There were substantial, significant improvements after treatment, including 54 percent mean improvement in patient’s own rating of their incontinence in both groups; a mean decrease of 3.1 and 3.2 on the St. Mark’s incontinence score (from 7.9 to 4.7 and 7.4 to 4.2 of 13) and relative improvements of 128 and 130 percent in the quality of life index (from 0.29 to 0.65 and 0.3 to 0.69 of 1) for the telephone-assisted and standard groups respectively. Importantly, there were no significant differences between the telephone-assisted or standard groups in any outcome. Of patients who completed treatment, 78 percent were better or much better. CONCLUSIONS A less intensive regime of biofeedback seems to be equally effective as the standard intensive protocol. This finding adds weight to the evolving concept that the physical aspects of biofeedback treatment, such as manometry or ultrasound, may not be necessary in the treatment of most patients with fecal incontinence. This needs to be further tested in a randomized, controlled trial. Dr. Byrne was supported by the Notaras Fellowship from the University of Sydney and the Training Board of the Colorectal Surgical Society of Australasia. Reprints are not available.     

Unilateral Pudendal Neuropathy is Common in Patients with Fecal Incontinence

Purpose Pudendal neuropathy and fecal incontinence frequently coexist; however, the contribution of neuropathy is unknown. The pudendal nerve innervates the external anal sphincter muscle, anal canal skin, and coordinates reflex pathways. Lateral dominance or a dominantly innervating nerve and its subsequent damage may have major implications in the etiology and treatment of fecal incontinence. This study was designed to establish the prevalence of pudendal neuropathy, in particular a unilateral one, and to examine the impact on anorectal function. Methods A total of 923 patients (745 females; mean age, 52 (range, 17–92) years) with fecal incontinence were studied using endoanal ultrasonography, anorectal manometry, rectal sensation, and pudendal nerve terminal motor latencies. Results A total of 520 patients (56 percent) demonstrated a pudendal neuropathy, which was unilateral in 38 percent (351 patients; 169 right-sided, 182 left-sided). Neuropathy, whether it was bilateral (bilateral vs. normal; 56 (range, 7–154) cm H₂O) vs. 67 (range, 5–215) cm H₂O; P < 0.01) or unilateral (unilateral vs. normal; 61 (range, 0–271) cm H₂O vs. 67 (range, 5–215) cm H₂O; P = 0.04) was associated with reduced anal resting tone. This also was seen with respect to squeeze increments (bilateral vs. normal; 34 (range, 0–207) cm H₂O vs. 52 (range, 0–378) cm H₂O; P < 0.001, unilateral vs. normal; 41 (range, 0–214) cm H₂O vs. 52 (range, 0–378) cm H₂O; P < 0.01). In those with intact sphincters, unilateral neuropathy was associated with reduced squeeze increments (unilateral vs. normal; 60 (range, 10–286) cm H₂O vs. 69 (range, 7–323) cm H₂O; P = 0.01) but no significant reduction in resting pressures. There was no association between pudendal neuropathy and abnormal rectal sensitivity. Conclusions Unilateral pudendal neuropathy is a common abnormality in individuals with fecal incontinence and is significantly associated with both attenuated resting pressures and squeeze increments. Although there are limitations in the interpretation of pudendal nerve terminal motor latencies, this study demonstrates that further exploration of the concept of lateral dominance is needed. Supported by a grant from Dunhill Medical Trust/Royal College of Surgeons. Poster presentation at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Seattle, Washington, June 3 to 7, 2006. Reprints are not available.     

Anal Electrical Stimulation With Long Pulses Increases Anal Sphincter Pressure in Conscious Dogs

Purpose This study was designed to investigate the effects and mechanisms of anal electric stimulation with long pulses on anal sphincter pressure in conscious dogs. Methods The study was performed after enema in nine healthy female hound dogs and composed of four randomized sessions (“dose”-response, anal electric stimulation only, or with atropine or phentolamine). The anal sphincter pressure was measured by using manometry and quantified by using the area under the contractile curve (mmHg/sec). Anal electric stimulation was performed via a pair of ring electrodes attached to a manometric catheter. The stimulation parameters in all but dose-response sessions included a frequency of 20 ppm, pulse width of 200 ms, and amplitude of 3 mA. Results The anal sphincter pressure was 55.7 ± 6 at baseline and increased by 37 percent to 76.4 ± 6.5 during electric stimulation (P = 0.009). The increase of anal pressure during stimulation was positively correlated with the stimulation energy (r = 0.395; P < 0.01). The excitatory effect of electric stimulation was sustained for at least 20 minutes. Atropine did not alter anal pressure and did not abolish the excitatory effect of anal electric stimulation on the sphincter. Phentolamine reduced anal pressure from the baseline value of 50.5 ± 4.7 to 33.1 ± 5.4 (P = 0.019). The electric stimulation induced increase in anal pressure was dropped from 19 ± 2.6 to 9.9 ± 2.8 (P = 0.029) at the presence of phentolamine. Conclusions Anal electric stimulation with long pulses increases anal sphincter pressure in an energy-dependent manner. The α-adrenergic but not the cholinergic pathway at least partially mediates the excitatory effect of anal electric stimulation. Presented at the meeting of Digestive Disease Week, Chicago, Illinois, May 14 to 19, 2005.     

New Surgical Options for Fecal Incontinence in Patients With Imperforate Anus

INTRODUCTION: Anorectal malformations are among the various etiologic factors causing fecal incontinence. Patients with imperforate anus are difficult to treat, specifically those with high lesions. The artificial bowel sphincter and electrically stimulated gracilis neosphincter are two relatively new techniques that have been used for the treatment of patients with severe refractory fecal incontinence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of these technologies in the treatment of patients with chronic fecal incontinence due to imperforate anus. METHODS: All patients with imperforate anus who had fecal incontinence and underwent either the artificial bowel sphincter procedure or the gracilis neosphincter procedure between February 1995 and December 2000 were evaluated. Preoperative and postoperative incontinence score (Cleveland Clinic Florida Incontinence Score; 0 = perfect continence; 20 = complete incontinence), quality of life, (Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale, 29 items forming 4 scales), and manometric sphincter pressure results were compared. RESULTS: Eleven patients had artificial bowel sphincter and five had the gracilis neosphincter (one nonstimulated) procedure. There were 11 males and 5 females of a mean age of 25.3 (range, 15–45) years. The mean follow-up time was 1.7 years (5 months to 5.7 years). Eight (50 percent) complications occurred in six patients, including three with fecal impaction (all artificial bowel sphincter), three with device migration (two gracilis neosphincter, one artificial bowel sphincter), and two patients with concomitant wound infection (one gracilis neosphincter, one artificial bowel sphincter); no patients had the devices explanted. Fourteen patients had manometric data (10 artificial bowel sphincter and 4 gracilis neosphincter) available. The overall incontinence score decreased from a preoperative mean of 18.5 to a postoperative mean of 7.5 in the artificial bowel sphincter group (P < 0.01) and from 17.4 to 9.4 in the gracilis neosphincter group (P = 0.06). All four Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scales increased in both the artificial bowel sphincter (lifestyle and depression/self-perception, P = 0.02; coping/behavior and embarrassment, P = 0.03) and the gracilis neosphincter (lifestyle and coping, P = 0.06; depression and embarrassment, P = 0.05) patients. As well, the mean resting and squeeze pressures increased with both techniques (artificial bowel sphincter: P = 0.008 and P = 0.02, respectively; gracilis neosphincter: P = 0.4 and P = 0.1, respectively). All results were statistically significant in the artificial bowel sphincter group. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial bowel sphincter and gracilis neosphincter are efficient methods to treat patients with imperforate anus. These techniques should be considered for patients with imperforate anus and severe fecal incontinence.     

Rehabilitation of Fecal Incontinence After Sphincter-Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Encouraging Results

Purpose  Some patients, having undergone sphincter-saving operations for rectal cancer, may suffer from fecal incontinence. This study was designed to evaluate the results of rehabilitative treatment in patients with fecal incontinence after sphincter-saving operations and to identify the negative factors that influence therapeutic success. Methods  Between January 2000 and June 2007, 88 incontinent patients (54 women; age range, 47–73 years; 69 had received a low anterior rectal resection; 19 a straight coloanal anastomosis) were included in the study. After a preliminary clinical evaluation, including the Wexner Incontinence Scale score, anorectal manometry was performed. All 88 patients underwent rehabilitative treatment according to the “multimodal rehabilitative program” for fecal incontinence. At the end of program, all 88 patients were reassessed by means of a clinical evaluation and anorectal manometry; their results were compared with the clinical and manometric data from ten healthy control subjects. Postrehabilitative Wexner Incontinence Scale scores were used for an arbitrary schedule of patients divided into three classes: Class I, good (score ≤3); Class II, fair (score >3 to ≤6); Class III, poor (score >6). Results  After rehabilitation, there was a significant improvement in the overall mean Wexner Incontinence Scale score (P < 0.03) for both surgical operation types (low anterior rectal resection: P < 0.05; coloanal anastomosis: P < 0.02). Only 21 patients (23.8 percent) were symptom-free, and 37 (42 percent) were considered Class III. A significant postrehabilitative direct correlation was found between: 1) Wexner Incontinence Scale score and degree of genital relaxation (rρ _s 0.78; P < 0.001); 2) Wexner Incontinence Scale score and irradiation (rρ _s 0.72; P < 0.01); and 3) Wexner Incontinence Scale score and pelvic (rρ _s 0.65; P < 0.01) or anal surgery (rρ _s 0.68; P < 0.01). No significant differences were found between prerehabilitative and postrehabilitative anal pressures in low anterior rectal resection and coloanal anastomosis patients. Conclusions  After rehabilitation, some patients become symptom-free, many patients show an improvement in the Wexner Incontinence Scale score, and others exhibit the highest grades of fecal incontinence. Genital relaxation, radiotherapy, and previous pelvic, and/or anal surgery are impeding factors to rehabilitative success.