Factors associated with failure of the artificial bowel sphincter: a study of over 50 cases from Cleveland Clinic Florida

Problems with repairing gut sphincters malfunctions

Correcting a gut sphincter malfunction is a difficult problem. Because each sphincter has two opposite functions, that of closure and opening, repairing one there is a risk of damaging the other. Indeed, widening a narrow sphincter, such as lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and anal sphincter, may cause gastroesophageal reflux and fecal incontinence, respectively, whereas narrowing a wide sphincter, may cause a difficult transit. All the corrective treatments for difficult or retrograde transit concerning LES and anal sphincter with their unwanted consequences have been analyzed and discussed. To overcome the drawbacks of sphincter surgical repairs, researchers have devised devices capable of closing and opening the gut lumen, named artificial sphincters (ASs). Their function is based on various mechanisms, e.g., hydraulic, magnetic, mechanical etc, operating through many complicated components, such as plastic cuffs, balloons, micropumps, micromotors, connecting tubes and wires, electromechanical clamps, rechargeable batteries, magnetic devices, elastic bands, etc. Unfortunately, these structures may facilitate the onset of infections and induce a local fibrotic reaction, which may cause device malfunctioning, whereas the compression of the gut wall to occlude the lumen may give rise to ischemia with erosions and other lesions. Some ASs are already being used in clinical practice, despite their considerable limits, while others are still at the research stage. In view of the adverse events of the ASs mentioned above, we considered applying bioengineering methods to analyze and resolve biomechanical and biological interaction problems with the aim to conceive and build efficient and safe biomimetic ASs.

Artificial sphincters: An overview from existing devices to novel technologies

Artificial sphincters (ASs) are used to replace the function of the biological sphincters in case of severe urinary and fecal incontinence (UI and FI), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The design of ASs is established on different mechanisms, e.g., magnetic forces or hydraulic pressure, with the final goal to achieve a implantable and durable AS. In clinical practice, the implantation of in-commerce AS is considered a reasonable solution, despite the sub-optimal clinical outcomes. The failure of these surgeries is due to the malfunction of the devices (between 46 and 51%) or the side effects on the biological tissues (more than 38%), such as infection and atrophy. Concentrating on this latter characteristic, particular attention has been given to the interaction between the biological tissues and AS, pointing out the closing mechanism around the duct and the effect on the tissues. To analyze this aspect, an overview of existing commercial/ready-on-market ASs for GERD, UI, and FI, together with the clinical outcomes available from the in-commerce AS, is given. Moreover, this invited review discusses ongoing developments and future research pathways for creating novel ASs. The application of engineering principles and design concepts to medicine enhances the quality of healthcare and improves patient outcomes. In this context, computational methods represent an innovative solution in the design of ASs, proving data on the occlusive force and pressure necessary to guarantee occlusion and avoid tissue damage, considering the coupling between different device sizes and individual variability.

Management of Fecal Incontinence

Nine percent of adult women experience episodes of fecal incontinence at least monthly. Fecal incontinence is more common in older women and those with chronic bowel disturbance, diabetes, obesity, prior anal sphincter injury, or urinary incontinence. Fecal incontinence negatively affects quality of life and mental health and is associated with increased risk of nursing home placement. Fewer than 30% of women with fecal incontinence seek care, and lack of information about effective solutions is an important barrier for both patients and health care professionals. Even among women with both urinary and fecal incontinence presenting for urogynecologic care, the rate of verbal disclosure of fecal incontinence symptoms remains low. This article provides an overview of the evaluation and management of fecal incontinence for the busy obstetrician-gynecologist, incorporating existing guidance from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Gastroenterology, and the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. The initial clinical evaluation of fecal incontinence requires a focused history and physical examination. Recording patient symptoms using a standard diary or questionnaire can help document symptoms and response to treatment. Invasive diagnostic testing and imaging generally are not needed to initiate treatment but may be considered in complex cases. Most women have mild symptoms that will improve with optimized stool consistency and medications. Additional treatment options include pelvic floor muscle strengthening with or without biofeedback, devices placed anally or vaginally, and surgery, including sacral neurostimulation, anal sphincteroplasty, and, for severely affected individuals for whom other interventions fail, colonic diversion.

The Artificial Bowel Sphincter in the Treatment of Fecal Incontinence, Long-term Complications

BACKGROUND

Fecal incontinence is a common and debilitating condition, of which the prevalence increases with age. Several medical and minimally invasive treatment modalities are available. However, for patients with greater sphincter defects, these treatments are often not sufficient. For these patients, the artificial bowel sphincter could be an alternative to colostomy. The artificial bowel sphincter has proven to be effective in the short term. Less is known whether the benefits sustain over time.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the long-term outcome of the artificial bowel sphincter in patients with refractory fecal incontinence.

DESIGN

A retrospective record review was conducted in conjunction with questionnaires.

SETTING

This study was conducted in a tertiary hospital setting.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was any complication. The secondary end point was fecal loss.

PATIENTS

The patients included were adults experiencing severe fecal incontinence treated with artificial bowel sphincter, operated on between 1997 and 2014.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were included in this study. After a median follow-up of 57 months (range, 1-198), the device had been explanted in 31 patients (49.2%; 95% CI, 36.5-62.0). In total, 101 reoperations were conducted, ranging from 1 to 6 reoperations per patient. The main reasons for revision were device failure and infection. At 5 years follow-up, 80% of the cohort had experienced a complication requiring surgery. Twenty-two (35%) patients had restored continence.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design and subjective secondary outcome.

CONCLUSION

Patients with severe end-stage fecal incontinence can benefit from artificial bowel sphincter, but this requires a large number of reoperations, and at least 20% of patients will eventually have a colostomy. Therefore, careful patient selection and the involvement of patients in decision making regarding the potential benefits and limitations of this technique are paramount. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B242. EL ESFÍNTER INTESTINAL ARTIFICIAL EN EL TRATAMIENTO DE LA INCONTINENCIA FECAL, COMPLICACIONES A LARGO PLAZO: La incontinencia fecal es una condición común y debilitante, cuya prevalencia aumenta con la edad. Se encuentran disponibles varias modalidades de tratamiento médico y mínimamente invasivo. Sin embargo, para pacientes con defectos del esfínter mayores, estos tratamientos a menudo no son suficientes. Para estos pacientes, el esfínter intestinal artificial (ABS) podría ser una alternativa a la colostomía. El esfínter intestinal artificial demostró ser efectivo a corto plazo. Se sabe menos si los beneficios se mantienen a lo largo del tiempo.El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar el resultado a largo plazo del esfínter intestinal artificial en pacientes con incontinencia fecal refractaria.Se realizó una revisión retrospectiva de los registros junto con los cuestionarios.Realizado en un entorno de hospital de tercel nivel.El punto final primario fue cualquier complicación, el punto final secundario fue la pérdida fecal.Los pacientes incluidos fueron adultos que padecían incontinencia fecal severa tratados con esfínter intestinal artificial, operados entre 1997 y 2014.Sesenta y tres pacientes fueron incluidos en este estudio. Después de una mediana de seguimiento de 57 meses (rango 1-198), el dispositivo había sido explantado en 31 pacientes (49.2%; 95CI 36.5-62.0). En total, se realizaron 101 reoperaciones, que oscilaron de una a seis reoperaciones por paciente. Las principales razones para la revisión fueron la falla del dispositivo y la infección. A los cinco años de seguimiento, el 80% de la cohorte había experimentado una complicación que requería cirugía. 22 pacientes habían recuperado la continencia (35%).Diseño retrospectivo y resultado secundario subjetivo.Los pacientes con incontinencia fecal grave en etapa terminal pueden beneficiarse del esfínter intestinal artificial, pero esto requiere una gran cantidad de reoperaciones y al menos el 20% de los pacientes eventualmente tendrán una colostomía. Por lo tanto, la selección cuidadosa del paciente y la participación de los pacientes en la toma de decisiones con respecto a los posibles beneficios y limitaciones de esta técnica es primordial. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B242.

Current surgical strategies to treat fecal incontinence

Fecal incontinence is a devastating condition, vastly under-reported, and may affect up to 18% of the population. While conservative management may be efficacious in a large portion of patients, those who are refractory will likely benefit from appropriate surgical intervention. There are a wide variety of surgical approaches to fecal incontinence management, and knowledge and experience are crucial to choosing the appropriate procedure and maximizing functional outcome while minimizing risk. In this article, we provide a comprehensive description of surgical options for fecal incontinence to help the clinician identify an appropriate intervention.

Outcomes of Reimplantation of the Artificial Bowel Sphincter

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of artificial bowel sphincter reimplantation for severe fecal incontinence remain unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and outcomes of artificial bowel sphincter reimplantation versus implantation.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective review study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single institution.

PATIENTS

Patients with severe incontinence who underwent de novo implantation and re-implantation between January 1998 and December 2012 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Complications, length of functional device time, success rates (functioning device at follow-up), patient demographics, comorbidities, etiology of incontinence, operative data, postoperative complications, and outcomes of initial implantation versus reimplantation were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 57 patients (mean age, 49.3 ± 13.5 years; 44 women) underwent implantation. Sixteen (28%) succeeded and 41 (72%) failed, requiring explantation; 17 of 41 patients underwent reimplantation; 5 had 2 reimplantations. There were 79 implantations and 50 explantations (63.3%) in total. Implantation and reimplantation procedures had similar lengths of operation, hospital stay, postoperative complications, and explantation rate. Most common reasons for device explantation were infection/erosion (27/50 (54%)) and malfunction (19/50 (38%)). Reasons for reimplantation included device malfunction/migration (17/22 (77.3%)) and/or infection/erosion (5/22 (22.7%)). Seven (41.2%) of 17 patients for whom reimplantation was attributed to noninfectious reasons had a functioning device, whereas only 1 (20.0%) of 5 who had reimplantation because of infection/erosion had a working device. At a median follow-up of 29.5 months (range, 1.0-215.0 months), 24 patients (42%) retained a functioning device (implantation = 16; reimplantation = 8). Success rates were not significantly different between initial implantation and reimplantation procedures (p = 0.755). There were no differences in the length of functional device time between implanted and reimplanted devices (p = 0.439).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its retrospective nature and small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Artificial bowel sphincter implantation has a high failure rate, requiring explantation in 72% of patients in this study. Reimplantation was often possible, with a success rate of 47%. Selected reimplantation for noninfectious complications had better outcomes than did reimplantation for septic causes. Short- and long-term outcomes are comparable to initial implantation.

Outcomes of Sacral Neurostimulation Lead Reimplantation for Fecal Incontinence: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Adverse events and complications have been reported after sacral neurostimulation for fecal incontinence, which may result in surgical revision and device explantation. Lead reimplantation may be feasible; however, available data regarding outcomes are less robust.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of sacral neurostimulation lead reimplantation for fecal incontinence.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at 2 clinical sites from a single institution.

PATIENTS

Patients with fecal incontinence who underwent sacral neurostimulation implantation or reimplantation between 2011 and 2014 were included in the study.

INTERVENTIONS

Sacral neurostimulation reimplantation was the included intervention.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Change in the Cleveland Clinic Florida Fecal Incontinence Score (0 best; 20 worst) in reimplantation as compared with index implantation controls was the main measure. Secondary outcomes included the frequency and type of adverse events and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients underwent either sacral neurostimulation implantation or reimplantation between 2011 and 2014. Ninety-seven patients underwent an index percutaneous nerve stimulation trial, 93 of whom also underwent a stimulator implantation. Fifteen patients underwent lead reimplantation, with 5 performed before stimulator implantation and 10 after stimulator implantation. The index implanted and reimplanted groups had similar demographics, comorbidities, and complication profiles including explantation rates. The most common reason for reimplantation was lead related (6/15), including 4 lead migrations, 1 lead fracture, and 1 lead erosion. Significant decreases in the incontinence score were achieved in each group (index implantation: p < 0.001; reimplantation: p = 0.006). When comparing the efficacy of sacral neurostimulation therapy in decreasing the fecal incontinence score from baseline in each group, patients with an index implantation were found to have a more significant improvement in their incontinence score as compared with the reimplantation group (p = 0.047).

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective study. A large number of patients with incomplete functional assessment data were excluded from analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The improvements in fecal incontinence are significantly better after index implantation than after reimplantation.

Fecal Incontinence: Etiology, Diagnosis, and Management

INTRODUCTION

Fecal incontinence is a debilitating condition affecting primarily the elderly. Many patients suffer in silence resulting in both underdiagnosis and undertreatment often culminating in an overall poor quality of life.

METHODS

We sought to review the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of fecal incontinence based on current literature. Additionally, newer treatment methods such as Solesta will be evaluated.

RESULTS

There are many diagnostic modalities available to assess the degree and severity of the patient's incontinence; however, a thorough history and physical exam is critical. Initial attempts at treatment focus on medical management primarily through stool texture modification with the aid of bulking agents. Failure of medical therapy is often followed by a graded increase in the complexity and invasiveness of the available treatment options. The selection of the most appropriate surgical option, such as overlapping sphincteroplasty and neuromodulation, is multifactorial involving both surgeon and patient-related factors. Neuromodulation has received increased attention in the last decade due to its documented therapeutic success, and newer office-based procedures, such as the Solesta injection, are showing promising results in properly selected patients. Finally, diversion remains an option for select patients who have failed all other therapies.

CONCLUSION

The etiology of fecal incontinence is multifactorial, involving a complex interplay between stool consistency and anatomic integrity. The diagnosis and treatment of fecal incontinence continue to evolve and are showing promising results.

Current and emerging treatment options for fecal incontinence

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a multifactorial disorder that imposes considerable social and economic burdens. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of current and emerging treatment options for FI. A MEDLINE search was conducted for English-language articles related to FI prevalence, etiology, diagnosis, and treatment published from January 1, 1990 through June 1, 2013. The search was extended to unpublished trials on ClinicalTrials.gov and relevant publications cited in included articles. Conservative approaches, including dietary modifications, medications, muscle-strengthening exercises, and biofeedback, have been shown to provide short-term benefits. Transcutaneous electrical stimulation was considered ineffective in a randomized clinical trial. Unlike initial studies, sacral nerve stimulation has shown reasonable short-term effectiveness and some complications. Dynamic graciloplasty and artificial sphincter and bowel devices lack randomized controlled trials and have shown inconsistent results and high rates of explantation. Of injectable bulking agents, dextranomer microspheres in non-animal stabilized hyaluronic acid (NASHA Dx) has shown significant improvement in incontinence scores and frequency of incontinence episodes, with generally mild adverse effects. For the treatment of FI, conservative measures and biofeedback therapy are modestly effective. When conservative therapies are ineffective, invasive procedures, including sacral nerve stimulation, may be considered, but they are associated with complications and lack randomized, controlled trials. Bulking agents may be an appropriate alternative therapy to consider before more aggressive therapies in patients who fail conservative therapies.

Three-year cost-effectiveness model for non-animal stabilized hyaluronic acid and dextranomer copolymer compared with sacral nerve stimulation after conservative therapy for the management of fecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Two new therapies for fecal incontinence (FI) are now available: non-animal stabilized hyaluronic acid and dextranomer copolymer (NASHA/Dx) and sacral nerve stimulation (SNS).

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of NASHA/Dx compared with SNS and conservative therapy (CT) for the treatment of FI after CT failure.

METHODS

Decision tree models with Markov subbranches were developed to compare all direct costs and outcomes during a 3-year period from the viewpoint of the US third-party payer. Costs (in 2013 US dollars) of devices, medical and surgical care, and hospitalization were included. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incontinence-free days (IFDs). Both costs and outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 3%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated for each outcome. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to examine robustness of results and model stability. A budget impact analysis was also undertaken to estimate the potential cost and savings of NASHA/Dx for a payer with 1,000,000 covered lives.

RESULTS

For the 3-year cost-effectiveness models, the expected cost was $9053 for CT, $14,962 for NASHA/Dx, and $33,201 for SNS. The numbers of QALYs were 1.769, 1.929, and 2.004, respectively. The numbers of IFDs were 128.8, 267.6, and 514.8, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per additional IFD gained were $42.60 for NASHA/Dx vs CT, $73.76 for SNS vs NASHA/Dx, and $62.55 for SNS vs CT. The incremental costs per QALY gained were $37,036 for NASHA/Dx vs CT, $244,509 for SNS vs NASHA/Dx, and $103,066 for SNS vs CT. The budget impact analysis evaluated the financial effect on the health care system of the use of NASHA/Dx and SNS. For the scenarios evaluated, when all of the patients receive NASHA/Dx, the net annual effect to the health care payer budget ranged from $571,455 to $2,857,275. When all of the patients receive SNS, the net annual effect to the health care payer budget ranged from $1,959,323 to $9,796,613.

CONCLUSION

Both NASHA/Dx and SNS have produced significant improvements in FI symptoms for affected patients. NASHA/Dx is a cost-effective and more efficient use of resources for the treatment of FI when compared with SNS. The budget impact analysis suggests that although reimbursement for NASHA/Dx treatment initially adds costs to the health care system, it is significantly less expensive than SNS for patients who are candidates for either treatment.

Emerging surgical therapies for faecal incontinence

Faecal incontinence is a common condition and is associated with considerable morbidity and economic cost. The majority of patients are managed with conservative interventions. However, for those patients with severe or refractory incontinence, surgical treatment might be required. Over the past 20 years, numerous developments have been made in the surgical therapies available to treat such patients. These surgical therapies can be classified as techniques of neuromodulation, neosphincter creation (muscle or artificial) and injection therapy. Techniques of neuromodulation, particularly sacral nerve stimulation, have transformed the management of these patients with a minimally invasive procedure that offers good results and low morbidity. By contrast, neosphincter procedures are characterized by being more invasive and associated with considerable morbidity, although some patients will experience substantial improvements in their continence. Injection of bulking agents into the anal canal can improve symptoms and quality of life in patients with mild-to-moderate incontinence, and the use of autologous myoblasts might be a future therapy. Further research and development is required not only in terms of the devices and procedures, but also to identify which patients are likely to benefit most from such interventions.

What's New in the Toolbox for Constipation and Fecal Incontinence?

Constipation and fecal incontinence (FI) are common complaints predominantly affecting the elderly and women. They are associated with significant morbidity and high healthcare costs. The causes are often multi-factorial and overlapping. With the advent of new technologies, we have a better understanding of their underlying pathophysiology which may involve disruption at any levels along the gut-brain-microbiota axis. Initial approach to management should always be the exclusion of secondary causes. Mild symptoms can be approached with conservative measures that may include dietary modifications, exercise, and medications. New prokinetics (e.g., prucalopride) and secretagogues (e.g., lubiprostone and linaclotide) are effective and safe in constipation. Biofeedback is the treatment of choice for dyssynergic defecation. Refractory constipation may respond to neuromodulation therapy with colectomy as the last resort especially for slow-transit constipation of neuropathic origin. Likewise, in refractory FI, less invasive approach can be tried first before progressing to more invasive surgical approach. Injectable bulking agents, sacral nerve stimulation, and SECCA procedure have modest efficacy but safe and less invasive. Surgery has equivocal efficacy but there are promising new techniques including dynamic graciloplasty, artificial bowel sphincter, and magnetic anal sphincter. Despite being challenging, there are no short of alternatives in our toolbox for the management of constipation and FI.

Current status: new technologies for the treatment of patients with fecal incontinence

Fecal incontinence is a frequent and debilitating condition that may result from a multitude of different causes. Treatment is often challenging and needs to be individualized. During the last several years, new technologies have been developed, and others are emerging from clinical trials to commercialization. Although their specific roles in the management of fecal incontinence have not yet been completely defined, surgeons have access to them and patients may request them. The purpose of this project is to put into perspective, for both the patient and the practitioner, the relative positions of new and emerging technologies in order to propose a treatment algorithm.

Current management of fecal incontinence: Choosing amongst treatment options to optimize outcomes

The severity of fecal incontinence widely varies and can have dramatic devastating impacts on a person’s life. Fecal incontinence is common, though it is often under-reported by patients. In addition to standard treatment options, new treatments have been developed during the past decade to attempt to effectively treat fecal incontinence with minimal morbidity. Non-operative treatments include dietary modifications, medications, and biofeedback therapy. Currently used surgical treatments include repair (sphincteroplasty), stimulation (sacral nerve stimulation or posterior tibial nerve stimulation), replacement (artificial bowel sphincter or muscle transposition) and diversion (stoma formation). Newer augmentation treatments such as radiofrequency energy delivery and injectable materials, are minimally invasive tools that may be good options before proceeding to surgery in some patients with mild fecal incontinence. In general, more invasive surgical treatments are now reserved for moderate to severe fecal incontinence. Functional and quality of life related outcomes, as well as potential complications of the treatment must be considered and the treatment of fecal incontinence must be individualized to the patient. General indications, techniques, and outcomes profiles for the various treatments of fecal incontinence are discussed in detail. Choosing the most effective treatment for the individual patient is essential to achieve optimal outcomes in the treatment of fecal incontinence.

Surgical management of fecal incontinence

The surgical approach to treating fecal incontinence is complex. After optimal medical management has failed, surgery remains the best option for restoring function. Patient factors, such as prior surgery, anatomic derangements, and degree of incontinence, help inform the astute surgeon regarding the most appropriate option. Many varied approaches to surgical management are available, ranging from more conservative approaches, such as anal canal bulking agents and neuromodulation, to more aggressive approaches, including sphincter repair, anal cerclage techniques, and muscle transposition. Efficacy and morbidity of these approaches also range widely, and this article presents the data and operative considerations for these approaches.

Anorectal incontinence: a challenge in diagnostic and therapeutic approach

Anorectal incontinence is a symptom of a complex multifactorial disorder involving the pelvic floor and anorectum, which is a severe disability and a major social problem. Various causes may affect the anatomical and functional integrity of the pelvic floor and anorectum, leading to the anorectal continence disorder and incontinence. The most common cause of anorectal incontinence is injury of the sphincter muscles following delivery or anorectal surgeries. Although the exact incidence of anorectal incontinence is unknown, various studies suggest that it affects ~2.2-8.3% of adults, with a significant prevalence in the elderly (>50%). The successful treatment of anorectal incontinence depends on the accurate diagnosis of its cause. This can be achieved by a thorough assessment of patients. The management of incontinent patients involves conservative therapeutic procedures, surgical techniques, and minimally invasive approaches.

The impact of anorectal malformations on anorectal function and social integration in adulthood: report from a national database

AIM

The impact of anorectal malformation (ARM) on bowel function and social, educational and occupational end-points was investigated in adult patients entered on a national database.

METHOD

Data from a national database of adult patients operated on between 1962 and 1999 for ARM were analysed. The database Malformations Ano-rectales et Pelviennes rares (MAREP) was part of a common information system, CEMARA, on rare congenital disorders. A self-administered questionnaire regarding bowel function, academic qualifications, employment and family status was mailed to patients. The type of ARM, subsequent follow-up and management including surgical interventions were retrospectively retrieved from medical records.

RESULTS

Of 210 adult patients on the registry since 2008, 68 were included in this study. Only three (8.5%) had had regular follow-up. All reported some disturbance in bowel function. The fertility rate of 1.5 children per woman did not differ from the general population.

CONCLUSION

Anorectal malformation ARM often leads to suboptimal bowel function in adulthood. This has an impact on social integration.

Factors associated with care seeking among women with accidental bowel leakage

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to characterize factors associated with care seeking among women with accidental bowel leakage (ABL).

METHODS

A secondary analysis of 938 women with ABL identified in a community-based Internet survey of 5817 US women 45 years or older was performed. Demographics, medical history, incontinence severity, quality of life, coping, and care seeking were assessed using questions derived from validated questionnaires. Accidental bowel leakage was defined as at least 1 episode of stool leakage in the past year in the absence of acute diarrheal illness. Women with ABL were asked, "Have you ever talked to a physician about accidental leakage of stool and/or gas?" and were designated "care seekers" if they responded affirmatively. Factors associated with care seeking on univariate analysis with P < 0.1 were included in a multivariate model.

RESULTS

The response rate overall was 85% (5817/6873) with 1096 women (19%) reporting ABL. Care-seeking data were available for 938 (86%). Of these, 85% were white, 6% were black/African American, 5% were of Hispanic/Latina/Spanish origin, and 4% other; median age was 55 to 59 years (range, 45 to 49, >75 years), and 87% were insured. Only 29% (268/938) of those with ABL sought care. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that care seekers were more likely to have a primary care physician (PCP), to have heard of ABL, and to have suffered longer with more severe leakage.

CONCLUSIONS

More than two thirds of women with ABL do not seek care. Because those with a PCP and those who have heard of the condition are more likely to seek care, educating the public about ABL and encouraging establishment of care and communication with a PCP may decrease silent suffering.

Technical and functional results of the artificial bowel sphincter for treatment of severe fecal incontinence: is there any benefit for the patient?

BACKGROUND

Fecal incontinence is a socially devastating problem that can be cured by the artificial bowel sphincter in selected cases.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates short- and long-term morbidity and functional results of the artificial bowel sphincter.

DESIGN

This study is a retrospective evaluation of consecutive patients.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at 2 academic colorectal units.

PATIENTS

Between May 2003 and July 2010, all consecutive patients who underwent artificial bowel sphincter implantation for severe fecal incontinence were included in the study.

INTERVENTION

The artificial bowel sphincter was implanted through 2 incisions made in the perineum and suprapubic area.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients were reviewed at months 1, 6, and 12, and then annually. Mortality, morbidity (early infection within the first 30 days after implant, and late thereafter), and reoperations including explantations were analyzed. Anal continence was evaluated by means of the Cleveland Clinic Florida score. Mean follow-up was 38 months (range, 12-98).

RESULTS

Between May 2003 and July 2010, 21 consecutive patients with a mean age of 51 years (range, 23-71) underwent surgery. There was no mortality. All patients presented with at least 1 complication. Infection or cutaneous ulceration occurred in 76% of patients, perineal pain in 29%, and rectal evacuation disorders in 38%. The artificial bowel sphincter was definitely explanted from 17 patients (81%). The artificial sphincter was able to be activated in 17 patients (81%), and continence was satisfactory at 1 year in those who still had their sphincter in place (n = 12).

CONCLUSION

There is a very high rate of morbidity and explantation after implantation of an artificial bowel sphincter for fecal incontinence. Four of 21 patients who still had an artificial sphincter in place had satisfactory continence at a mean follow-up of 38 months.

Accidental bowel leakage in the mature women's health study: prevalence and predictors

BACKGROUND

The 2007 National Institutes of Health incontinence consensus panel emphasised the need for classification and identification of persons at risk for faecal incontinence (FI).

OBJECTIVES

To explore the prevalence of FI; to characterise severity and 'bother'; and to identify factors associated with FI in a large sample of community-dwelling women.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A cohort of US women ≥ 45 years old was surveyed via an internet-based questionnaire between September 2009 and April 2010.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Accidental leakage of liquid or solid stool at least once in the last 12 months.

KEY RESULTS

Eighty-five per cent of those surveyed (5817/6873) participated and were predominantly white, well educated and insured. The prevalence of FI at least once in the past year was 18.8% (1096/5817; 95% CI: 17.8-19.9%) and 97% of these women were bothered by this frequency of leakage. Among 938 respondents with FI, 71.1% (667) preferred the term 'accidental bowel leakage' (ABL) over faecal or bowel incontinence. Bowel disorders, urinary incontinence, stroke, age 55-64, diabetes mellitus and prior vaginal delivery were associated with an increased odds of FI, whereas being married, Black or American Indian/Alaska Native race/ethnicity, and income ≥ $40,000 per year were associated with a decreased odds of FI.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one-fifth of mature US women suffer from bothersome leakage of stool at least yearly and the overwhelming majority prefer the term 'Accidental Bowel Leakage.' Those with bowel disorders and urinary incontinence are most likely to experience ABL. Incorporating questions regarding ABL or bowel and bladder disorders into routine screening may aid in identifying silent sufferers of ABL.

Fecal incontinence: etiology, evaluation, and treatment

Fecal incontinence is a debilitating problem facing ~2.2% of the U.S. general population over 65 years of age. Etiologic factors include traumatic, neurologic, congenital, and iatrogenic. Most commonly, obstetric trauma causes fecal incontinence as well as poorly performed anorectal surgery or pelvic radiation. Several severity scores and quality of life indexes have been developed to quantify incontinent symptoms. There are several nonsurgical and surgical options for the treatment of fecal incontinence. Biofeedback is among the most successful nonoperative strategies. Depending on the cause, anal sphincter repair, artificial bowel sphincter, and sacral nerve stimulation are used to treat fecal incontinence with some success. Unfortunately, fecal incontinence is an extremely difficult problem to manage: there has not been one, single treatment option that has proven to be both safe and effective in long-term studies.

The artificial bowel sphincter: a single institution experience over a decade

OBJECTIVE

A report on the long-term results of a consecutive series of patients implanted with the Acticon Neosphincter.

METHOD

Data were reviewed from a prospective database. From May 1996 to Jan 2010, 52 patients (46 women), mean age 51.5 ± 14.8 years, with severe fecal incontinence for a mean of 10.6 ± 10.5 years, were implanted with 85 devices. All patients had failed conservative management, including 13 with unsuccessful prior surgical treatments. Indications for implantation were sphincter destruction (45), pudendal neuropathy (12), congenital malformation (7), and perineal colostomy (4). Preoperative assessment included anal endosonography, anorectal manometry, and electrophysiologic testing. Incontinence (Wexner) and Quality of Life scores were recorded prior to the procedure and at each follow-up visit, together with annual anal physiology assessments. Cumulative risks of device revision and explantation were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 64.3 ± 46.5 months (range, 2-169); 26 patients (50%) required revisions after a mean of 57.7 ± 35.0 months, with 73.1% due to a leaking cuff from a microperforation; 14 patients (26.9%) required definitive explantation after a mean of 14.6 ± 7.9 months, with the majority (42.9%) due to infection; and 9 patients were lost to follow-up. In 35 patients (67.3%) with an activated device, there were significant improvements in both median Wexner (P < 0.0001) and Quality-of-life scores (P = 0.0286). There was a significant difference between preoperative resting anal pressures and closed pressures at activation (P < 0.0001) and latest follow-up (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

With careful patient selection, meticulous surgical technique, and dedicated surveillance, favorable long-term results can be achieved with acceptable rates of revision and explantation.

Long-term efficacy and safety of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Sacral nerve stimulation is effective in the treatment of urinary incontinence and is currently under Food and Drug Administration review in the United States for fecal incontinence. Previous reports have focused primarily on short-term results of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence. The present study reports the long-term effectiveness and safety of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence in a large prospective multicenter study.

DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients with fecal incontinent episodes more than twice per week were offered participation in this multicentered prospective trial. Patients showing ≥ 50% improvement during test stimulation were offered chronic implantation of the InterStim Therapy system (Medtronic; Minneapolis, MN). The aims of the current report were to provide 3-year follow-up data on patients from that study who underwent sacral nerve stimulation and were monitored under the rigors of an Food and Drug Administration-approved investigational protocol.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-three patients underwent test stimulation with a 90% success rate, of whom 120 (110 females) with a mean age of 60.5 years and a mean duration of fecal incontinence of 7 years received chronic implantation. Mean length of follow-up was 3.1 (range, 0.2-6.1) years, with 83 patients completing all or part of the 3-year follow-up assessment. At 3 years follow-up, 86% of patients (P < .0001) reported ≥ 50% reduction in the number of incontinent episodes per week compared with baseline and the number of incontinent episodes per week decreased from a mean of 9.4 at baseline to 1.7. Perfect continence was achieved in 40% of subjects. The therapy also improved the fecal incontinence severity index. Sacral nerve stimulation had a positive impact on the quality of life, as evidenced by significant improvements in all 4 scales of the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life instrument at 12, 24, and 36 months of follow-up. The most common device- or therapy-related adverse events through the mean 36 months of follow-up included implant site pain (28%), paresthesia (15%), change in the sensation of stimulation (12%), and infection (10%). There were no reported unanticipated adverse device effects associated with sacral nerve stimulation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacral nerve stimulation using InterStim Therapy is a safe and effective treatment for patients with fecal incontinence. These data support long-term safety and effectiveness to 36 months.

The magnetic anal sphincter versus the artificial bowel sphincter: a comparison of 2 treatments for fecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Fecal incontinence is a debilitating ailment, and surgery offers the only recourse for the patients in whom conservative treatment fails.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to report the first matched comparison between patients implanted with the magnetic anal sphincter and the artificial bowel sphincter.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

From December 2008 to June 2010, 10 female patients, median age 64.5 years (range, 42-76), with severe fecal incontinence for a median of 7.5 years (range, 1-40), were implanted with the magnetic anal sphincter. Ten female patients implanted with the artificial bowel sphincter were identified. Both groups were matched for age, etiology, duration of incontinence, and preoperative functional scores.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes measures included length of hospitalization, complications, and changes in functional scores (anorectal physiology, incontinence, and quality of life).

RESULTS

Patients with the magnetic anal sphincter had a shorter median operative time (62 vs 97.5 min, P = .0273), length of hospitalization(4.5 vs 10 days, P < .001), and follow-up duration (8 vs 22.5 mo, P = .0068), without a statistically significant difference in 30-day complications (4 vs 2, P = .628) and revision/explantation (1 vs 4, P = .830). Both groups achieved significant improvements in preoperative incontinence (P < .0002) and quality-of-life scores (P < .009). In a comparison of baseline resting anal pressures, patients with the artificial bowel sphincter had significantly higher pressures with the cuff inflated (P = .0082), and those with the magnetic anal sphincter had a significant increase as well (P = .0469). At the latest review, both groups had similar quality-of-life scores (P = .374); patients with the artificial bowel sphincter had higher (median) closed-cuff anal pressures compared with the anal resting pressure of those with a magnetic anal sphincter (89 vs 58.5 cmH2O, P = .0147), together with more constipation (4 vs 1, P = .830) and a trend toward better incontinence scores (P = .0625).

LIMITATIONS

This was a nonrandomized study with small patient numbers.

CONCLUSION

In the short term, the magnetic anal sphincter is as effective as the artificial bowel sphincter in restoring continence and quality of life.

Anal encirclement with a simple prosthetic sling for faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Millions of people suffer from anal incontinence not currently treated due to the complexity and cost of the surgical techniques in use. The purpose of this report is to evaluate the results of anal encirclement with a simple device in a group of patients with faecal incontinence of multiple causes.

METHODS

Surgery was performed as a modified Thiersch procedure through minimal perianal incisions, and a flat band of silicone was introduced to encircle the anus. Results were assessed by clinical response and objectively evaluated by comparing pre- and post-operative manometry, Jorge-Wexner and QOL (Rockwood) scores.

RESULTS

Over a period of 5 years, this procedure was performed in 20 women and 13 men, mean age 54 years (27-86 years). Causes of incontinence were iatrogenic (5), obstetric (5), idiopathic (5), restorative proctectomy (5), rectal prolapsed (4), congenital (4), neuropathic (3), trauma (1) and mixed (1). Mortality was nil and morbidity was related to early infection (n = 2) and late skin erosion/infection (n = 2). Early or late breaking of the sling occurred in nine patients, due to the inappropriate method of closing the device. There were 13 explants: 3 as definitive and 10 re-implantations. All but one patient improved the clinical status which was objectively assessed by Jorge-Wexner and QOL scores, with significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

This simple, safe and low-cost technique is useful for treating from disturbing soiling to severe incontinence in all those patients with failed sphincteroplasty or not amenable to sphincter repair. However, a proper device needs to be designed.

Magnetic anal sphincter augmentation for the treatment of fecal incontinence: a preliminary report from a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Magnetic sphincter augmentation, a successful treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease, has been applied to treat fecal incontinence. The purpose of this feasibility study was to understand the safety profile as well as the potential benefit of this new device when it is implanted in patients with fecal incontinence.

METHODS

A magnetic anal sphincter device was surgically implanted in candidates with documented fecal incontinence of more than 2 episodes per week at 3 investigational centers in Europe and the United States following ethics/institutional review board approval. The magnetic anal sphincter device was placed around the anal canal via a single anterior incision. All data were collected prospectively. The primary outcome measure was the reduction of incontinent episodes based on a daily continence diary.

RESULTS

To date 14 patients have been implanted with the device (all female; mean age, 62.8 y; range, 41-74 y) with a median follow-up of 6 months. There have been no intraoperative complications. Mean hospital stay was 3 days; range, 1 to 7 days. Adverse events were observed in 7 patients. Three patients are no longer implanted with a device; 2 devices were removed and one passed spontaneously following a separation at the suture connection. Five patients with 6-month follow-up demonstrated a mean reduction in the number of average weekly incontinence episodes from 7.2 to 0.7 (90.9%) and a mean reduction in Wexner Continence Score from 17.2 to 7.8 (54.7%). Compared with baseline, quality of life improved in all 4 domains of the fecal incontinence quality of life (FIQoL) scoring system. No patients have reported that their condition has worsened. Two patients at 1-year follow-up both reported perfect continence.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary study describes the use of a new device to treat fecal incontinence. Compared with existing devices, implantation is simple and it requires no adjustments from the physician or patient once the device is implanted. Initial assessment with a small number of patients shows promising outcomes with a limited incidence of complications and good restoration of continence.