Electrical stimulation for faecal incontinence in adults

Pelvic Floor Disorders Due to Anal Sexual Activity in Men and Women: A Narrative Review

Recent evidence shows that consensual anal penetrative intercourse has become more prevalent, not only limited to gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men but also for women who are in a sexual relationship with men. The aim of this review was to study the influence of consensual anal intercourse on pelvic floor function and the role of pelvic floor physical therapy treatment in preventing or treating consensual anal intercourse-induced anodyspareunia and/or fecal incontinence. We reviewed 68 references that showed that anal penetrative intercourse is a risk factor for anodyspareunia and fecal incontinence in both men and women. This risk of anal intercourse may increase with emotional discomfort, an overactive pelvic floor, lack of lubrication, frequency of anal penetrative intercourse, and hard practice (BDSM: bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, sadism, and masochism). It seems that pelvic floor physical therapists play an essential role in preventing and treating pelvic floor dysfunctions due to anal intercourse, which can lead to anodyspareunia and fecal incontinence; the treatment includes education, pelvic floor training with and without biofeedback, electric stimulation, manual therapy, and dilatators. Further studies are warranted to enhance our understanding of the causes and treatment efficacy of pelvic floor dysfunctions due to anal penetrative intercourse.

Rapid priority setting exercise on faecal incontinence for Cochrane Incontinence

Objective

This rapid priority setting exercise aimed to identify, expand, prioritise and explore stakeholder (patients, carers and healthcare practitioners) topic uncertainties on faecal incontinence (FI).

Design

An evidence gap map (EGM) was produced to give a visual overview of emerging trial evidence; existing systematic review-level evidence and FI stakeholder topic uncertainties derived from a survey. This EGM was used in a knowledge exchange workshop that promoted group discussions leading to the prioritisation and exploration of FI stakeholder identified topic uncertainties.

Results

Overall, a mismatch between the existing and emerging evidence and key FI stakeholder topic uncertainties was found. The prioritised topic uncertainties identified in the workshop were as follows: psychological support; lifestyle interventions; long-term effects of living with FI; education; constipation and the cultural impact of FI. When these six prioritised topic uncertainties were explored in more depth, the following themes were identified: education; impact and burden of living with FI; psychological support; healthcare service improvements and inconsistencies; the stigma of FI; treatments and management; culturally appropriate management and technology and its accessibility.

Conclusions

Topic uncertainties identified were broad and wide ranging even after prioritisation. More research is required to unpick the themes emerging from the in-depth discussion and explore these further to achieve a consensus on deliverable research questions.

Pelvic floor physical therapy in the treatment of chronic anal fissure (PAF-study): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic anal fissure (CAF) is a common cause of severe anorectal pain with a high incidence rate. Currently, a wide range of treatment options are available with recurrence rates varying between 7 and 42%. Pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) is a treatment option for increased pelvic floor muscle tone and dyssynergia which often accompanies CAF. However, literature on this subject is scarce. The Pelvic Floor Anal Fissure (PAF)-study aims to determine the efficacy and effectiveness of PFPT on improvement on pelvic floor muscle tone and function, pain, healing of the fissure, quality of life and complaint reduction in patients with CAF.

METHODS

The PAF-study is a single-centre, two armed, randomized controlled trial. Patients with CAF and pelvic floor dysfunction are eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria include abscess, fistula, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, anorectal malignancy, prior rectal radiation, and pregnancy. A total of 140 patients will be randomized for either PFPT or postponed treatment of PFPT.The primary outcome is tone at rest during electromyographic registration of the pelvic floor before and after therapy. Secondary outcomes consist of healing of the fissure, pain ratings, improvement of pelvic floor function, complaint reduction and quality of life. Primary and secondary endpoints are measured at 8 and 20 weeks and at 1-year follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Currently, there is a gap in treatment modalities between conservative management and surgery. This manuscript prescribes the rationale, design, and methodology of a randomized controlled trial investigating PFPT as a treatment option for patients with CAF.

Kegel Exercises, Biofeedback, Electrostimulation, and Peripheral Neuromodulation Improve Clinical Symptoms of Fecal Incontinence and Affect Specific Physiological Targets: An Randomized Controlled Trial

Background/Aims

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a prevalent condition among community-dwelling women, and has a major impact on quality of life (QoL). Research on treatments commonly used in clinical practice—Kegel exercises, biofeedback, electrostimulation, and transcutaneous neuromodulation—give discordant results and some lack methodological rigor, making scientific evidence weak. The aim is to assess the clinical efficacy of these 4 treatments on community-dwelling women with FI and their impact on severity, QoL and anorectal physiology.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial was conducted on 150 females with FI assessed with anorectal manometry and endoanal ultrasonography, and pudendal nerve terminal motor latency, anal/rectal sensory-evoked-potentials, clinical severity, and QoL were determined. Patients were randomly assigned to one of the following groups Kegel (control), biofeedback + Kegel, electrostimulation + Kegel, and neuromodulation + Kegel, treated for 3 months and re-evaluated, then followed up after 6 months.

Results

Mean age was 61.09 ± 12.17. Severity of FI and QoL was significantly improved in a similar way after all treatments. The effect on physiology was treatment-specific Kegel and electrostimulation + Kegel, increased resting pressure (P < 0.05). Squeeze pressures strongly augmented with biofeedback + Kegel, electrostimulation + Kegel and neuromodulation + Kegel (P < 0.01). Endurance of squeeze increased in biofeedback + Kegel and electrostimulation + Kegel (P < 0.01). Rectal perception threshold was reduced in the biofeedback + Kegel, electrostimulation + Kegel, and neuromodulation + Kegel (P < 0.05); anal sensory-evoked-potentials latency shortened in patients with electrostimulation + Kegel (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

The treatments for FI assessed have a strong and similar efficacy on severity and QoL but affect specific pathophysiological mechanisms. This therapeutic specificity can help to develop more efficient multimodal algorithm treatments for FI based on pathophysiological phenotypes.

Japanese Practice Guidelines for Fecal Incontinence Part 2-Examination and Conservative Treatment for Fecal Incontinence- English Version

Examination for fecal incontinence is performed in order to evaluate the condition of each patient. As there is no single method that perfectly assesses this condition, there are several tests that need to be conducted. These are as follows: anal manometry, recto anal sensitivity test, pudendal nerve terminal motor latency, electromyogram, anal endosonography, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, and defecography. In addition, the mental and physical stress most patients experience during all these examinations needs to be taken into consideration. Although some of these examinations mostly apply for patients with constipation, we hereby describe these tests as tools for the assessment of fecal incontinence. Conservative therapies for fecal incontinence include diet, lifestyle, and bowel habit modification, pharmacotherapy, pelvic floor muscle training, biofeedback therapy, anal insert device, trans anal irrigation, and so on. These interventions have been identified to improve the symptoms of fecal incontinence by determining the mechanisms resulting in firmer stool consistency; strengthening the pelvic floor muscles, including the external anal sphincter; normalizing the rectal sensation; or periodic emptying of the colon and rectum. Among these interventions, diet, lifestyle, and bowel habit modifications and pharmacotherapy can be performed with some degree of knowledge and experience. These two therapies, therefore, can be conducted by all physicians, including general practitioners and other physicians not specializing in fecal incontinence. However, patients with fecal incontinence who did not improve following these initial therapies should be referred to specialized institutions. Contrary to the initial therapies, specialized therapies, including pelvic floor muscle training, biofeedback therapy, anal insert device, and trans anal irrigation, should be conducted in specialized institutions as these require patient education and instructions based on expert knowledge and experience. In general, conservative therapies should be performed for fecal incontinence before surgery because its pathophysiologies are mostly attributed to benign conditions. All Japanese healthcare professionals who take care of patients with fecal incontinence are expected to understand the characteristics of each conservative therapy, so that appropriate therapies will be selected and performed. Therefore, in this chapter, the characteristics of each conservative therapy for fecal incontinence are described.

Plugs for containing faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a distressing disorder with high social stigma. Not all people with faecal incontinence can be cured with conservative or surgical treatment and they may need to rely on containment products, such as anal plugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the performance of different types of anal plugs for containment of faecal incontinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 26 May 2015). Reference lists of identified trials were searched and plug manufacturers were contacted for trials. No language or other limitations were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: this review was limited to randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (including crossovers) of anal plug use for the management of faecal incontinence.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

children and adults with faecal incontinence.Types of interventions: any type of anal plug. Comparison interventions might include no treatment, conservative (physical) treatments, nutritional interventions, surgery, pads and other types or sizes of plugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data from the included trials. Authors of all included trials were contacted for clarification concerning methodological issues.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 136 participants were included. Two studies compared the use of plugs versus no plugs, one study compared two sizes of the same brand of plug, and one study compared two brands of plugs. In all included studies there was considerable dropout (in total 48 (35%) dropped out before the end of the study) for varying reasons. Data presented are thus subject to potential bias. 'Pseudo-continence' was, however, achieved by some of those who continued to use plugs, at least in the short-term. In a comparison of two different types of plug, plug loss was less often reported and overall satisfaction was greater during use of polyurethane plugs than polyvinyl-alcohol plugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data were limited and incomplete, and not all pre-specified outcomes could be evaluated. Consequently, only tentative conclusions are possible. The available data suggest that anal plugs can be difficult to tolerate. However, if they are tolerated they can be helpful in preventing incontinence. Plugs could then be useful in a selected group of people either as a substitute for other forms of management or as an adjuvant treatment option. Plugs come in different designs and sizes; the review showed that the selection of the type of plug can impact on its performance.

Dutch evidence statement for pelvic physical therapy in patients with anal incontinence

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

To promote agreement among and support the quality of pelvic physiotherapists' skills and clinical reasoning in The Netherlands, an Evidence Statement Anal Incontinence (AI) was developed based on the practice-driven problem definitions outlined. We present a summary of the current state of knowledge and formulate recommendations for a methodical assessment and treatment for patients with AI, and place the evidence in a broader perspective of current developments.

METHODS

Electronic literature searches were conducted in relevant databases with regard to prevalence, incidence, costs, etiological and prognostic factors, predictors of response to therapy, prevention, assessment, and treatment. The recommendations have been formulated on the basis of scientific evidence and where no evidence was available, recommendations were consensus-based.

RESULTS

The evidence statement incorporates a practice statement with corresponding notes that clarify the recommendations, and accompanying flowcharts, describing the steps and recommendations with regard to the diagnostic and therapeutic process. The diagnostic process consists of history-taking and physical examination supported by measurement instruments. For each problem category for patients with AI, a certain treatment plan can be distinguished dependent on the presence of pelvic floor dysfunction, awareness of loss of stools, comorbidity, neurological problems, adequate anorectal sensation, and (in)voluntary control. Available evidence and expert opinion support the use of education, pelvic floor muscle training, biofeedback, and electrostimulation in selected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence statement reflects the current state of knowledge for a methodical and systematic physical therapeutic assessment and treatment for patients with AI.

Current management of fecal incontinence

OBJECTIVE

To review the management of fecal incontinence, which affects more than 1 in 10 people and can have a substantial negative impact on quality of life.

METHODS

The medical literature between 1980 and April 2012 was reviewed for the evaluation and management of fecal incontinence.

RESULTS

A comprehensive history and physical examination are required to help understand the severity and type of symptoms and the cause of incontinence. Treatment options range from medical therapy and minimally invasive interventions to more invasive procedures with varying degrees of morbidity. The treatment approach must be tailored to each patient. Many patients can have substantial improvement in symptoms with dietary management and biofeedback therapy. For younger patients with large sphincter defects, sphincter repair can be helpful. For patients in whom biofeedback has failed, other options include injectable medications, radiofrequency ablation, or sacral nerve stimulation. Patients with postdefecation fecal incontinence and a rectocele can benefit from rectocele repair. An artificial bowel sphincter is reserved for patients with more severe fecal incontinence.

CONCLUSION

The treatment algorithm for fecal incontinence will continue to evolve as additional data become available on newer technologies.

Perianal injectable bulking agents as treatment for faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a complex and distressing condition with significant medical and social implications. Injection of perianal bulking agents has been used to treat the symptoms of passive faecal incontinence. However, various agents have been used without a standardised technique and the supposed benefit of the treatment is largely anecdotal with a limited clinical research base.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of perianal injection of bulking agents for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register of trials (25 May 2012), ZETOC (3 May 2012), clinical trials registries (3 May 2012) and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing the use of injectable bulking agents for faecal incontinence with any alternative treatments or placebo were reviewed to evaluate the therapeutic effects. Case-control and cohort studies were also reviewed to assess risks and complications associated with the treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (YM and CN) assessed the methodological quality of eligible trials and independently extracted data from the included trials using a range of pre-specified outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

Five eligible randomised trials with a total of 382 patients were identified. Four of the trials were at an uncertain or high risk of bias.Most trials reported a short term benefit from injections regardless of the material used, including placebo saline injection. One study demonstrated dextranomer in stabilised hyaluronic acid (NASHA Dx) to be more effective than sham injection but with more adverse effects. Dextranomer in stabilised hyaluronic acid (NASHA Dx) was better than sham injections at six months (65/136, 48% versus 48/70, 69% participants not improved, defined as less than 50% reduction in incontinence episodes, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88; with more incontinence free days (3.1 days compared with 1.7 in the sham treatment group, MD 1.40 days, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.47). Another study comparing silicone material (PTQ™) to saline injections was too small to demonstrate a clinical benefit compared to the control injection of normal saline.A silicone biomaterial (PTQ™) was shown to provide some advantages and was safer in treating faecal incontinence than carbon-coated beads (Durasphere®) in the short term.Similarly, there were short term benefits from injections delivered under ultrasound guidance compared with digital guidance.No long term evidence on outcomes was available and further conclusions were not warranted from the available data. None of the studies reported patient evaluation of outcomes and thus it is difficult to gauge whether the improvement in incontinence scores matched practical symptom improvements that mattered to the patients.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

One large randomised controlled trial has shown that this form of treatment using dextranomer in stabilised hyaluronic acid (NASHA Dx) improves continence for a little over half of patients in the short term. However, the number of identified trials was limited and most had methodological weaknesses.

Electrical stimulation and biofeedback for the treatment of fecal incontinence: a systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review determines the best known form of biofeedback (BF) and/or electrical stimulation (ES) for the treatment of fecal incontinence in adults and rates the quality of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Attention is given to type, strength, and application mode of the current for ES and to safety.

METHODS

Methods followed the Cochrane Handbook. Randomized controlled trials were included. Studies were searched in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE (registration number (PROSPERO): CRD42011001334).

RESULTS

BF and/or ES were studied in 13 randomized parallel-group trials. In 12 trials, at least one therapy group received BF alone and/or in combination with ES, while ES alone was evaluated in seven trials. Three (four) trials were rated as of high (moderate) quality. Average current strength was reported in three of seven studies investigating ES; only two studies reached the therapeutic window. No trial showed superiority of control, or of BF alone or of ES alone when compared with BF + ES. Superiority of BF + ES over any monotherapy was demonstrated in several trials. Amplitude-modulated medium-frequency (AM-MF) stimulation, also termed pre-modulated interferential stimulation, combined with BF was superior to both low-frequency ES and BF alone, and 50 % of the patients were continent after 6 months of treatment. Effects increased with treatment duration. Safety reporting was bad, and there are safety issues with some forms of low-frequency ES.

CONCLUSIONS

There is sufficient evidence for the efficacy of BF plus ES combined in treating fecal incontinence. AM-MF plus BF seems to be the most effective and safe treatment.

KEY MESSAGES

• The higher the quality of the randomized trial the more likely was a significant difference between treatment groups. • Two times more patients became continent when biofeedback was used instead of a control, such as pelvic floor exercises. • Two times more patients became continent when biofeedback plus electrical stimulation was used instead of biofeedback only. • Low-frequency electrical stimulation can have adverse device effects, and this is in contrast to amplitude-modulated medium-frequency electrical stimulation. • There is high quality evidence that amplitude-modulated medium-frequency electrical stimulation plus electromyography biofeedback is the best second-line treatment for fecal incontinence.

Pelvic floor muscle training for prevention and treatment of urinary and faecal incontinence in antenatal and postnatal women

BACKGROUND

About a third of women have urinary incontinence and up to a 10th have faecal incontinence after childbirth. Pelvic floor muscle training is commonly recommended during pregnancy and after birth both for prevention and the treatment of incontinence.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of pelvic floor muscle training compared to usual antenatal and postnatal care on incontinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which includes searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process and handsearching (searched 7 February 2012) and the references of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised trials in pregnant or postnatal women. One arm of the trial needed to include pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT). Another arm was either no PFMT or usual antenatal or postnatal care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials were independently assessed for eligibility and methodological quality. Data were extracted then cross checked. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Data were processed as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Three different populations of women were considered separately, women dry at randomisation (prevention); women wet at randomisation (treatment); and a mixed population of women who might be one or the other (prevention or treatment). Trials were further divided into those which started during pregnancy (antenatal); and those started after delivery (postnatal).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two trials involving 8485 women (4231 PFMT, 4254 controls) met the inclusion criteria and contributed to the analysis.Pregnant women without prior urinary incontinence (prevention) who were randomised to intensive antenatal PFMT were less likely than women randomised to no PFMT or usual antenatal care to report urinary incontinence up to six months after delivery (about 30% less; risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.95, combined result of 5 trials).Postnatal women with persistent urinary incontinence (treatment) three months after delivery and who received PFMT were less likely than women who did not receive treatment or received usual postnatal care to report urinary incontinence 12 months after delivery (about 40% less; RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.03, combined result of 3 trials). It seemed that the more intensive the programme the greater the treatment effect.The results of seven studies showed a statistically significant result favouring PFMT in a mixed population (women with and without incontinence symptoms) in late pregnancy (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.94, random-effects model). Based on the trial data to date, the extent to which mixed prevention and treatment approaches to PFMT in the postnatal period are effective is less clear (that is, offering advice on PFMT to all pregnant or postpartum women whether they have incontinence symptoms or not). It is possible that mixed prevention and treatment approaches might be effective when the intervention is intensive enough.There was little evidence about long-term effects for either urinary or faecal incontinence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that for women having their first baby, PFMT can prevent urinary incontinence up to six months after delivery. There is support for the widespread recommendation that PFMT is an appropriate treatment for women with persistent postpartum urinary incontinence. It is possible that the effects of PFMT might be greater with targeted rather than mixed prevention and treatment approaches and in certain groups of women (for example primiparous women; women who had bladder neck hypermobility in early pregnancy, a large baby, or a forceps delivery). These and other uncertainties, particularly long-term effectiveness, require further testing.

Mesenchymal stem cells can improve anal pressures after anal sphincter injury

OBJECTIVE

Fecal incontinence reduces the quality of life of many women but has no long-term cure. Research on mesenchymal stem cell (MSC)-based therapies has shown promising results. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate functional recovery after treatment with MSCs in two animal models of anal sphincter injury.

METHODS

Seventy virgin female rats received a sphincterotomy (SP) to model episiotomy, a pudendal nerve crush (PNC) to model the nerve injuries of childbirth, a sham SP, or a sham PNC. Anal sphincter pressures and electromyography (EMG) were recorded after injury but before treatment and 10 days after injury. Twenty-four hours after injury, each animal received either 0.2 ml saline or 2 million MSCs labelled with green fluorescing protein (GFP) suspended in 0.2 ml saline, either intravenously (IV) into the tail vein or intramuscularly (IM) into the anal sphincter.

RESULTS

MSCs delivered IV after SP resulted in a significant increase in resting anal sphincter pressure and peak pressure, as well as anal sphincter EMG amplitude and frequency 10 days after injury. MSCs delivered IM after SP resulted in a significant increase in resting anal sphincter pressure and anal sphincter EMG frequency but not amplitude. There was no improvement in anal sphincter pressure or EMG with in animals receiving MSCs after PNC. GFP-labelled cells were not found near the external anal sphincter in MSC-treated animals after SP.

CONCLUSION

MSC treatment resulted in significant improvement in anal pressures after SP but not after PNC, suggesting that MSCs could be utilized to facilitate recovery after anal sphincter injury.

Biofeedback and/or sphincter exercises for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a particularly embarrassing and distressing condition with significant medical, social and economic implications. Anal sphincter exercises (pelvic floor muscle training) and biofeedback therapy have been used to treat the symptoms of people with faecal incontinence. However, standards of treatment are still lacking and the magnitude of alleged benefits has yet to be established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of biofeedback and/or anal sphincter exercises/pelvic floor muscle training for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 24 January 2012) which contains trials from searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE and handsearching of conference proceedings; and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials evaluating biofeedback and/or anal sphincter exercises in adults with faecal incontinence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed the risk of bias of eligible trials and two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials. A wide range of outcome measures were considered.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty one eligible studies were identified with a total of 1525 participants. About half of the trials had low risk of bias for randomisation and allocation concealment.One small trial showed that biofeedback plus exercises was better than exercises alone (RR for failing to achieve full continence 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.94).One small trial showed that adding biofeedback to electrical stimulation was better than electrical stimulation alone (RR for failing to achieve full continence 0.47, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.65).The combined data of two trials showed that the number of people failing to achieve full continence was significantly lower when electrical stimulation was added to biofeedback compared against biofeedback alone (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.78).Sacral nerve stimulation was better than conservative management which included biofeedback and PFMT (at 12 months the incontinence episodes were significantly fewer with sacral nerve stimulation (MD 6.30, 95% CI 2.26 to 10.34).There was not enough evidence as to whether there was a difference in outcome between any method of biofeedback or exercises. There are suggestions that rectal volume discrimination training improves continence more than sham training. Further conclusions are not warranted from the available data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The limited number of identified trials together with methodological weaknesses of many do not allow a definitive assessment of the role of anal sphincter exercises and biofeedback therapy in the management of people with faecal incontinence. We found some evidence that biofeedback and electrical stimulation may enhance the outcome of treatment compared to electrical stimulation alone or exercises alone. Exercises appear to be less effective than an implanted sacral nerve stimulator. While there is a suggestion that some elements of biofeedback therapy and sphincter exercises may have a therapeutic effect, this is not certain. Larger well-designed trials are needed to enable safe conclusions.

Plugs for containing faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a distressing disorder with high social stigma. Not all people with faecal incontinence can be cured with conservative or surgical treatment and they may need to rely on containment products, such as anal plugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the performance of different types of anal plugs for containment of faecal incontinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 29 February 2012). Reference lists of identified trials were searched and plugs manufacturers were contacted for trials. No language or other limitations were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: This review was limited to randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (including crossovers) of anal plug use for the management of faecal incontinence.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Children and adults with faecal incontinence.Types of interventions: Any type of anal plug. Comparison interventions might include no treatment, conservative (physical) treatments, nutritional interventions, surgery, pads and other types or sizes of plugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data from the included trials. Authors of all included trials were contacted for clarification concerning methodological issues.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 136 participants were included. Two studies compared the use of plugs versus no plugs, one study compared two sizes of the same brand of plug, and one study compared two brands of plugs. In all included studies there was considerable dropout (in total 48 (35%) dropped out before the end of the study) for varying reasons. Data presented are thus subject to potential bias. 'Pseudo-continence' was, however, achieved by some of those who continued to use plugs, at least in the short-term. In a comparison of two different types of plug, plug loss was less often reported and overall satisfaction was greater during use of polyurethane plugs than polyvinyl-alcohol plugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data were limited and incomplete, and not all pre-specified outcomes could be evaluated. Consequently, only tentative conclusions are possible. The available data suggest that anal plugs can be difficult to tolerate. However, if they are tolerated they can be helpful in preventing incontinence. Plugs could then be useful in a selected group of people either as a substitute for other forms of management or as an adjuvant treatment option. Plugs come in different designs and sizes; the review showed that the selection of the type of plug can impact on its performance.

Low current electrical stimulation upregulates cytokine expression in the anal sphincter

AIM

Stem cells are an emerging treatment for regeneration of damaged anal sphincter tissues. Homing to the site of injury can be potentiated by stromal derived factor 1 (SDF-1) and monocyte chemotactic protein 3 (MCP-3) expression. The effects of electrical stimulation (ES) on upregulation of these cytokines were investigated.

METHODS

The anal sphincter complex of Sprague Dawley rats was stimulated with current of 0.25 mA, pulse duration of 40 pulses/s, pulse width of 100 μs, and frequency of 100 Hz for 1 or 4 h. Sham was created using the same needle which was inserted into the anal sphincter without electrical stimulation in different groups of animals. The rats were euthanized immediately or 24 h after stimulation. Cytokine analysis was performed using real-time polymerase chain reaction. Statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Results are presented as a fold increase compared to sham that was normalized to 1. SDF-1 and MCP-3 immediately after 1 h were 2.5 ± 0.77 and 3.1± 0.93 vs. sham, respectively, showing significant increase. After 1-h stimulation and euthanasia 24 h after, SDF-1 and MCP-3 were 1.49 ± 0.16 and 1.51± 0.14 vs. sham, respectively, showing significant increase. Immediately and 24 h after 4-h stimulation, SDF-1 was 1.21 ± 0.16 and 0.54 ± 0.16 vs. sham, respectively, and was not significantly different. Immediately and 24 h after 4-h stimulation, MCP-3 was 1.29 ± 0.41 and 0.35 ±1.0 vs. sham, respectively, and was not significantly different. SDF-1 and MCP-3 after 1 h were significantly higher than after 4 h of stimulation at both time points.

CONCLUSION

Electrical stimulation for 1 h significantly upregulates SDF-1 and MCP-3 expression that persists for 24 h. Prolonged stimulation reduced chemokine expression, suggesting electrolysis of cells.

Triple-target treatment versus low-frequency electrostimulation for anal incontinence: a randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In the nonsurgical treatment of anal incontinence, the combination of amplitude-modulated medium-frequency stimulation and electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BF), known as triple-target treatment (3T), is superior to EMG-BF alone. The aim of this trial is to compare 3T with the standard treatment, low-frequency stimulation (LFS).

METHODS

80 patients with anal incontinence of Grade I or higher who presented to physicians or centers specialized in coloproctology were enrolled in this multicenter randomized trial with blinded observer. The trial had an open parallel-group design. Randomization was performed centrally by telephone. The primary endpoint was the Cleveland Clinic Score (CCS) after self-training at home with either 3T or LFS in two 20-minute sessions per day for 6 months. The secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients regaining continence, and the patients' quality of life (QoL). On completion of the trial as planned, the results were evaluated with an intention-to-treat analysis.

STUDY REGISTRATION

DRKS00000138 (http://register.germanctr.de).

RESULTS

39 patients were randomized to 3T, and 41 to LFS. After 6 months of treatment, the CCS (mean ± standard deviation) was 3.1 ± 4.2 in the 3T group and 9.6 ± 3.9 in the LFS group. The median improvement in the CCS at 6 months compared to baseline was 7 points greater in the 3T group than in the LFS group (95% CI: 5-9, p<0.001). Anal continence was regained by 54% of the 3T patients, but none of the LFS patients (95% CI for the difference: 37.18% - 69.91%, p<0.001). QoL scores were higher in all dimensions in the 3T group than in the LFS group. No major adverse effects occurred in either group.

CONCLUSION

3T is superior to LFS in the treatment of anal incontinence. The available evidence suggests that the success of 3T is based on the combined effect of biofeedback and medium-frequency stimulation. LFS of the type applied in this trial has no effect. 3T should be used in routine clinical practice instead of LFS.

Raising awareness about fecal incontinence

There is a lack of awareness about fecal incontinence despite its prevalence and adverse impact on quality of life. Inadequate knowledge about fecal incontinence deters help-seeking, therapeutic consultation, and clinical research about effective prevention and management strategies. A systematic, evidenced-based approach to raise awareness of fecal incontinence is essential to forward progress and overcome multiple barriers. In this manuscript, strategies of this approach are prioritized and focus on increasing continence literacy and communication, emphasizing prevention and screening, disseminating evidenced-based management interventions, and promoting larger scale impact through effective partnerships.

Fecal incontinence: part 4 of a series of articles on incontinence

BACKGROUND

The aging of the population will make fecal incontinence an increasingly important socioeconomic problem in the coming decades. Already today, the cost to society of treating incontinence with inserts, diapers, and closed systems exceeds the total cost of all cardiac and anti-inflammatory medications.

METHODS

This article is based on a selective review of the literature and on clinical experience. No meta-analyses on this topic have yet been published.

RESULTS

Surveys in highly industrialized countries in the Western Hemisphere have shown that about 5% of the population suffers from fecal incontinence of varying degrees of severity. This condition will become more common, in both relative and absolute terms, in the coming decades. Various methods of care and therapy are currently available for fecal incontinence, yet many patients do not seek medical help for it because of embarrassment. Thus, its true prevalence is certainly higher than the surveys imply.

CONCLUSION

The challenge today, therefore, is not just to encourage patients to seek medical help early, but also to raise physicians' awareness of fecal incontinence and their readiness to treat it, so that they can provide competent individual counseling and treatment to all patients who suffer from it.

Perianal injectable bulking agents as treatment for faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a complex and distressing condition with significant medical and social implications. Injection of perianal bulking agents has been used to treat the symptoms of passive faecal incontinence. However, various different agents have been used without a standardised technique and the supposed benefit of the treatment is largely pragmatic with a limited clinical research base.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of perianal injection of bulking agents for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register of trials (searched 10 June 2009), ZETOC (searched 18 July 2009), clinical trials registries (searched 18 July 2009) and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing use of injectable bulking agents for faecal incontinence with any alternative treatments or placebo were reviewed to evaluate the therapeutic effects. Case-control and cohort studies were also reviewed to assess risks and complications associated with the treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality of eligible trials and independently extracted data from included trials using a range of pre-specified outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

Four eligible randomised trials were identified with a total of 176 patients. All trials but one were at an uncertain or high risk of bias. Most trials reported a short term benefit from injections regardless of the material used as outcome measures improved over time. A silicone biomaterial (PTQ), was shown to provide some advantages and was safer in treating faecal incontinence than carbon-coated beads (Durasphere(R)) in the short term. Similarly, there were short term benefits from injections delivered under ultrasound guidance compared with digital guidance. However, PTQ did not demonstrate obvious clinical benefit compared to control injection of normal saline. No long term evidence on outcomes was available and further conclusions were not warranted from the available data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A definitive conclusion cannot be drawn regarding the effectiveness of perianal injection of bulking agents for faecal incontinence due to the limited number of identified trials together with methodological weaknesses. Within the available data, however, we found no reliable evidence for effectiveness of one treatment over another in improving faecal incontinence. Larger well-designed trials with adequate numbers of subjects using reliable validated outcome measures are needed to allow definitive assessment of the treatment for both effectiveness and safety.

Evaluation and treatment of anal incontinence, constipation, and defecatory dysfunction

Posterior compartment disorders include anal incontinence, constipation, and defecatory dysfunction. These disorders cause considerable morbidity, and are typically underreported by patients and undertreated by providers. The purpose of this article is outline the approach to diagnosis and treatment of anal incontinence, constipation, and defecatory dysfunction with a brief description of the nature of the problem and approaches to evaluation and diagnosis, as well as medical and surgical management.

Fecal incontinence and biofeedback therapy

Biofeedback as delivered in most clinical settings in Western medicine has been consistently reported to improve symptoms of fecal incontinence. Closer scrutiny of the elements of the intervention and controlled studies, however, have consistently failed to find any benefit of the biofeedback element of this complex package of care; nor has any superiority been found for one modality over another. There is a need for further well-designed and adequately powered randomized controlled trials. Meanwhile, there can be little doubt that conservative interventions improve many patients with fecal incontinence to the point where most report satisfaction with treatment and do not wish to consider more invasive options, such as surgery.

Plugs for containing faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a distressing disorder with high social stigma. Not all people with faecal incontinence can be cured with conservative or surgical treatment and they may need to rely on containment products, such as anal plugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the performance of different types of anal plugs for containment of faecal incontinence.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 22 November 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2004), CINAHL (January 1982 to November Week 3 2004), EMBASE (January 1996 to 2004 Week 47), INVERT (Dutch nursing database) (January 1993 to November 2004) and Web of Science (January 1988 to November 2004). Reference lists of identified trials were searched and plugs manufacturers were contacted for trials. No language or other limitations were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: This review was limited to randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (including crossovers) of anal plug use for the management of faecal incontinence.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Children and adults with faecal incontinence. Types of interventions: Any type of anal plug. Comparison interventions might include no treatment, conservative (physical) treatments, nutritional interventions, surgery, pads and other types or sizes of plugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data from the included trials. Authors of all included trials were contacted for clarification concerning methodological issues.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 136 participants were included. Two studies compared the use of plugs versus no plugs, one study compared two sizes of the same brand of plug, and one study compared two brands of plugs. In all included studies there was considerable dropout (in total 48 (35%) dropped out before the end of the study) for varying reasons. Data presented are thus subject to potential bias. 'Pseudo-continence' was, however, achieved by some of those who continued to use plugs, at least in the short-term. In a comparison of two different types of plug, plug loss was less often reported and overall satisfaction was greater during use of polyurethane plugs than polyvinyl-alcohol plugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data were limited and incomplete, and not all pre-specified outcomes could be evaluated. Consequently, only tentative conclusions are possible. The available data suggest that anal plugs can be difficult to tolerate. However, if they are tolerated they can be helpful in preventing incontinence. Plugs could then be useful in a selected group of people either as a substitute for other forms of management or as an adjuvant treatment option. Plugs come in different designs and sizes; the review showed that the selection of the type of plug can impact on its performance.

Drug treatment for faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a common symptom which causes significant distress and reduction in quality of life. Available treatment options for faecal incontinence include conservative treatments (biofeedback, pelvic floor muscle training, dietary manipulation or drug therapy) or surgical treatments (e.g. sphincter repair, post anal repair, neosphincter). Drug treatment is often given either alone or in combination with other treatment modalities.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of drug therapy for the treatment of faecal incontinence. In particular, to assess the effects of individual drugs relative to placebo or other drugs, and to compare drug therapy with other treatment modalities.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group trials register (January 2003) and the reference lists of relevant articles. Date of the most recent search: January 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of the use of pharmacological agents for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Working independently, reviewers selected studies from the literature, assessed the methodological quality of each trial, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials were identified for inclusion in this review. Nine trials were of cross-over design. Seven trials included only people with faecal incontinence related to liquid stool (either chronic diarrhoea or following ileoanal pouch surgery). Three trials (total 58 participants) compared topical phenylephrine gel with placebo. Two trials (56 participants) compared loperamide with placebo. One trial (11 participants) compared loperamide oxide with placebo. One trial (15 participants) compared diphenoxylate plus atropine with placebo. One trial (17 participants) compared sodium valproate with placebo. One trial (30 participants) compared loperamide with codeine with diphenoxylate plus atropine. Two further trials (total 265 participants) assessed the use of lactulose in elderly people.No studies comparing drugs with other treatment modalities were identified. There was limited evidence that antidiarrhoeal drugs and drugs which enhance anal sphincter tone may reduce faecal incontinence in patients with liquid stools. However, the trials were small and of short duration.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The small number of trials identified for this review assessed several different drugs in a variety of patient populations. The focus of most of the included trials was on the treatment of diarrhoea, rather than faecal incontinence. There is little evidence to guide clinicians in the selection of drug therapies for faecal incontinence. Larger, well-designed controlled trials, which include clinically important outcome measures, are required.