Does the radiofrequency procedure for fecal incontinence improve quality of life and incontinence at 1-year follow-up?

Novel Nonablative Radiofrequency Approach for the Treatment of Anal Incontinence: A Phase 1 Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to describe the action, impact on quality of life, and side effects of perianal nonablative radiofrequency (RF) application in the treatment of anal incontinence (AI) in women.

METHODS

This was a pilot, randomized clinical trial conducted between January and October 2016. We enrolled women who consecutively attended the Attention Center of the Pelvic Floor (CAAP) with complaints of AI for more than six months. Nonablative RF was applied to the perianal region of the participants using Spectra G2 (Tonederm®, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil). The reduced or complete elimination of the need for protective undergarments (diapers and absorbents) was considered a partial therapeutic response.

RESULTS

Nine participants reported treatment satisfaction, while one reported dissatisfaction with the nonablative RF treatment of AI based on the Likert scale. No patient interrupted treatment sessions because of adverse effects, although adverse effects occurred in six participants. However, the clinical and physical examination of the participants with burning sensations showed no hyperemia or mucosal lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed a promising reduction of fecal loss, participant satisfaction with treatment, and improved lifestyle, behavior, and depression symptoms with minimal adverse effects.

Critical appraisal of international guidelines for the management of fecal incontinence in adults: is it possible to define what to do in different clinical scenarios?

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a complex often multifactorial functional disorder which is associated with a significant impact on patients’ quality of life. There is a broad spectrum of symptoms, and degrees of severity and diverse patient backgrounds. Several treatment algorithms from different professional societies and experts are available in the literature. However, no consensus has been reached on several aspects of FI management. We performed a critical review of the most recently published guidelines on FI, emphasising the lack of consensus, highlighting specific topics mentioned in each of the guidelines that are not covered in the others and defining the treatment proposed in different clinical scenarios.

Surgical Treatment Alternatives to Sacral Neuromodulation for Fecal Incontinence: Injectables, Sphincter Repair, and Colostomy

Fecal incontinence is a prevalent health problem that affects over 20% of healthy women. Many surgical treatment options exist for fecal incontinence after attempts at non-operative management. In this article, the authors discuss surgical treatment options for fecal incontinence other than sacral neuromodulation.

Tools for fecal incontinence assessment: lessons for inflammatory bowel disease trials based on a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Fecal incontinence is a disabling condition affecting up to 20% of women.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated fecal incontinence assessment in both inflammatory bowel disease and non-inflammatory bowel disease patients to propose a diagnostic approach for inflammatory bowel disease trials.

METHODS

We searched on Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library for all studies on adult inflammatory bowel disease and non-inflammatory bowel disease patients reporting data on fecal incontinence assessment from January 2009 to December 2019.

RESULTS

In total, 328 studies were included; 306 studies enrolled non-inflammatory bowel disease patients and 22 studies enrolled inflammatory bowel disease patients. In non-inflammatory bowel disease trials the most used tools were the Wexner score, fecal incontinence quality of life questionnaire, Vaizey score and fecal incontinence severity index (in 187, 91, 62 and 33 studies). Anal manometry was adopted in 41.2% and endoanal ultrasonography in 34.0% of the studies. In 142 studies (46.4%) fecal incontinence evaluation was performed with a single instrument, while in 64 (20.9%) and 100 (32.7%) studies two or more instruments were used. In inflammatory bowel disease studies the Wexner score, Vaizey score and inflammatory bowel disease quality of life questionnaire were the most commonly adopted tools (in five (22.7%), five (22.7%) and four (18.2%) studies). Anal manometry and endoanal ultrasonography were performed in 45.4% and 18.2% of the studies.

CONCLUSION

Based on prior validation and experience, we propose to use the Wexner score as the first step for fecal incontinence assessment in inflammatory bowel disease trials. Anal manometry and/or endoanal ultrasonography should be taken into account in the case of positive questionnaires.

PREDICTORS OF UNSUCCESSFUL OF TREATMENT FOR FECAL INCONTINENCE BIOFEEDBACK FOR FECAL INCONTINENCE IN FEMALE

BACKGROUND

Biofeedback is an effective method of treatment for fecal incontinence but there is controversy regarding factors that may be correlated with its effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of biofeedback in the treatment of fecal incontinence, identifying the predictive factors for unsuccessful treatment.

METHODS

Consecutive female patients who had fecal incontinence and were treated with a full course of biofeedback were screened. The symptoms were evaluated using Cleveland Clinic incontinence (CCF) score before and six months after the completion of therapy. Patients had a satisfactory clinical response to biofeedback if the CCF score had decreased by more than 50% at six months (GI) and an unsatisfactory response if the CCF score did not decrease or if the score decreased by <50% (GII). The groups were compared with regard to age, score, anal resting and squeeze pressures and sustained squeeze pressure by manometry, history of vaginal delivery, number of vaginal deliveries, menopause, hysterectomy, and previous anorectal surgery.

RESULTS

Of 124 women were included, 70 (56%) in GI and 54 (44%) in GII. The median CCF score decreased significantly from 10 to 5 (P=0.00). FI scores were higher in GII. Patients from GII had more previous vaginal deliveries and previous surgeries. The mean sustained squeeze pressure was higher in GI. Patients from GI and GII had similar ages, number of vaginal deliveries, menopause, hysterectomy, anal pressures, and sphincter defects. The median sustained squeeze pressure increased significantly before and after biofeedback in GI.

CONCLUSION

Biofeedback therapy shows effective treatment with 50% reductions in FI score in half of patients. Factors associated with unsuccessful outcome include FI score ≥10, previous vaginal delivery, previous anorectal and/or colorectal surgery, and reduced mean sustained squeeze pressure.

SECCA procedure for anal incontinence and antibiotic treatment: a case report of anal abscess

Background

Fecal Incontinence (FI) can seriously affect quality of life. The treatment of fecal incontinence starts conservatively but in case of failure, different surgical approaches may be proposed to the patient. Recently several not invasive approaches have been developed. One of these is the radiofrequency (RF) energy application to the internal anal sphincter.

Case presentation

We report a rare case of an anal abscess related to a SECCA procedure in a 66-year-old woman affected by gas and FI for twenty years.

Conclusions

The complications post-SECCA procedure reported in literature are generally not serious and often self-limited, such as bleeding or anal pain. This is a case of an anal abscess.

We suggest that this finding could consolidate the importance of administering antibiotic therapy to patients and to run a full course of at least 6 days rather than a short-term (24 h) therapy, with the aim to minimize the incidence of this complication.

Surgical Interventions and the Use of Device-Aided Therapy for the Treatment of Fecal Incontinence and Defecatory Disorders

The purpose of this clinical practice update expert review is to describe the key principles in the use of surgical interventions and device-aided therapy for managing fecal incontinence (FI) and defecatory disorders. The best practices outlined in this review are based on relevant publications, including systematic reviews and expert opinion (when applicable). Best Practice Advice 1: A stepwise approach should be followed for management of FI. Conservative therapies (diet, fluids, techniques to improve evacuation, a bowel training program, management of diarrhea and constipation with diet and medications if necessary) will benefit approximately 25% of patients and should be tried first. Best Practice Advice 2: Pelvic floor retraining with biofeedback therapy is recommended for patients with FI who do not respond to the conservative measures indicated above. Best Practice Advice 3: Perianal bulking agents such as intra-anal injection of dextranomer may be considered when conservative measures and biofeedback therapy fail. Best Practice Advice 4: Sacral nerve stimulation should be considered for patients with moderate or severe FI in whom symptoms have not responded after a 3-month or longer trial of conservative measures and biofeedback therapy and who do not have contraindications to these procedures. Best Practice Advice 5: Until further evidence is available, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation should not be used for managing FI in clinical practice. Best Practice Advice 6: Barrier devices should be offered to patients who have failed conservative or surgical therapy, or in those who have failed conservative therapy who do not want or are not eligible for more invasive interventions. Best Practice Advice 7: Anal sphincter repair (sphincteroplasty) should be considered in postpartum women with FI and in patients with recent sphincter injuries. In patients who present later with symptoms of FI unresponsive to conservative and biofeedback therapy and evidence of sphincter damage, sphincteroplasty may be considered when perianal bulking injection and sacral nerve stimulation are not available or have proven unsuccessful. Best Practice Advice 8: The artificial anal sphincter, dynamic graciloplasty, may be considered for patients with medically refractory severe FI who have failed treatment or are not candidates for barrier devices, sacral nerve stimulation, perianal bulking injection, sphincteroplasty and a colostomy. Best Practice Advice 9: Major anatomic defects (eg, rectovaginal fistula, full-thickness rectal prolapse, fistula in ano, or cloaca-like deformity) should be rectified with surgery. Best Practice Advice 10: A colostomy should be considered in patients with severe FI who have failed conservative treatment and have failed or are not candidates for barrier devices, minimally invasive surgical interventions, and sphincteroplasty. Best Practice Advice 11: A magnetic anal sphincter device may be considered for patients with medically refractory severe FI who have failed or are not candidates for barrier devices, perianal bulking injection, sacral nerve stimulation, sphincteroplasty, or a colostomy. Data regarding efficacy are limited and 40% of patients had moderate or severe complications. Best Practice Advice 12: For defecatory disorders, biofeedback therapy is the treatment of choice. Best Practice Advice 13: Based on limited evidence, sacral nerve stimulation should not be used for managing defecatory disorders in clinical practice. Best Practice Advice 14: Anterograde colonic enemas are not effective in the long term for management of defecatory disorders. Best Practice Advice 15: The stapled transanal rectal resection and related procedures should not be routinely performed for correction of structural abnormalities in patients with defecatory disorders.

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.

Systematic Review of Surgical Treatments for Fecal Incontinence

BACKGROUND

No systematic review has examined the collective randomized and nonrandomized evidence for fecal incontinence treatment effectiveness across the range of surgical treatments.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy, comparative effectiveness, and harms of surgical treatments for fecal incontinence in adults.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Allied and Complementary Medicine, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, as well as hand searches of systematic reviews, were used as data sources.

STUDY SELECTION

Two investigators screened abstracts for eligibility (surgical treatment of fecal incontinence in adults, published 1980-2015, randomized controlled trial or observational study with comparator; case series were included for adverse effects). Full-text articles were reviewed for patient-reported outcomes. We extracted data, assessed study risk of bias, and evaluated strength of evidence for each treatment-outcome combination.

INTERVENTIONS

Surgical treatments for fecal incontinence were included interventions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Fecal incontinence episodes/severity, quality of life, urgency, and pain were measured.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies met inclusion criteria (13 randomized trials and 9 observational trials); 53 case series were included for harms. Most patients were middle-aged women with mixed FI etiologies. Intervention and outcome heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. Evidence was insufficient for all of the surgical comparisons. Few studies examined the same comparisons; no studies were high quality. Functional improvements varied; some authors excluded those patients with complications or lost to follow-up from analyses. Complications ranged from minor to major (infection, bowel obstruction, perforation, and fistula) and were most frequent after the artificial bowel sphincter (22%-100%). Major surgical complications often required reoperation; few required permanent colostomy.

LIMITATIONS

Most evidence is intermediate term, with small patient samples and substantial methodologic limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence was insufficient to support clinical or policy decisions for any surgical treatments for fecal incontinence in adults. More invasive surgical procedures had substantial complications. The lack of compliance with study reporting standards is a modifiable impediment in the field. Future studies should focus on longer-term outcomes and attempt to identify subgroups of adults who might benefit from specific procedures.

Impact of fecal incontinence and its treatment on quality of life in women

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a physically and psychosocially debilitating disorder which negatively impacts quality of life (QOL). It bears a significant burden not only on patients but also on their families, caretakers as well as society as a whole. Even though it is considered a somewhat common condition, especially as women age, the prevalence is often underestimated due to patients' reluctance to report symptoms or seek care. The evaluation and treatment of FI can be also hindered by lack of understanding of the current management options among healthcare providers and how they impact on QOL. This article provides a comprehensive review on the impact of FI and its treatment on QOL in women.

Clinical response and sustainability of treatment with temperature-controlled radiofrequency energy (Secca) in patients with faecal incontinence: 3 years follow-up

BACKGROUND

Controlled delivery of radio frequent energy (Secca) has been suggested as treatment for faecal incontinence (FI).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study is to evaluate clinical response and sustainability of Secca for FI.

DESIGN

This is a prospective cohort study.

PATIENTS

This study involved patients who had failed full conservative management for FI.

INTERVENTIONS

This study was performed between 2005 and 2010.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

FI was scored using the Vaizey score (VS). A clinically significant response to Secca was defined as ≥50 % reduction in incontinence score. Impact of FI on quality of life (QOL) was measured using the FIQL. Data was obtained at baseline, at 6 months and at 1 and 3 years. Anal endosonography and anal manometry were performed at 3 months and compared to baseline.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients received Secca. During follow-up, 5/31 (16 %), 3/31 (10 %) and 2/31 (6 %) of patients maintained a clinically significant response after the Secca procedure. Mean VS of all patients was 18 (SD 3), 14 (SD 4), 14 (SD 4) and 15 (SD 4), at baseline, 6 months and 1 and 3 years. No increases in anorectal pressures or improvements in rectal compliance were found. Coping improved between baseline and t = 6 months. No predictive factors for success were found.

LIMITATIONS

This is a non-randomised study design.

CONCLUSION

This prospective non-randomised trial showed disappointing outcomes of the Secca procedure for the treatment of FI. The far minority of patients reported a clinically significant response of seemingly temporary nature. Secca might be valuable in combination with other interventions for FI, but this should be tested in strictly controlled randomised trials.

Temperature-controlled radiofrequency energy in patients with anal incontinence: an interim analysis of worldwide data

BACKGROUND

Controlled delivery of radiofrequency energy (SECCA procedure) as treatment for anal incontinence (AI) was introduced 15 years ago. Since then, several clinical studies have emerged. This article evaluates the clinical response and sustainability of SECCA for patients with AI.

METHODS

Only original clinical studies retrieved from PubMed and Medline were included. The outcome measures, faecal incontinence scores, definition of response, clinical results and anorectal evaluation were analysed.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included, which involved 150 original patients. Three studies reported a long-term follow-up. The one-year follow-up shows a moderate effect, which declines somewhat over time. Only minor temporary side-effects are reported and none of the patients declined treatment.

CONCLUSION

SECCA is a safe and well-tolerated procedure that is easy to perform without any serious short- or long-term complications, but with only a moderate clinical effect that declines over time. Results of randomized, sham-controlled controlled trials are awaited.

What is the best option for failed sphincter repair?

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of various procedures for patients with fecal incontinence following failed sphincteroplasty.

METHOD

Patients who underwent surgery for failed sphincteroplasty from January 2000 to June 2011 [corrected] were identified. They were assessed using the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life (FIQoL) scale and the Cleveland Clinic Florida-Wexner Fecal Incontinence Score (CCFFIS).

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients [97% females; median age 52 (25-81) years] were identified. They underwent either repeat sphincteroplasty (RS; n = 33), artificial bowel sphincter (ABS; n = 11) or sacral nerve stimulation (SNS; n = 15). The median follow-up was 31 (3-138) months. The RS group had a significantly wider external sphincter defect and had undergone fewer previous sphincteroplasties. The most common complication was infection. The incidence of complications was significantly higher after ABS (73%) compared with RS (24%) and SNS (33%) (P = 0.01). Seventeen (29%) patients required re-operation for complications or failure, with a lower rate in the RS group (P = 0.004). There was no difference in the rates of device removal after ABS or SNS. Ten (17%) patients underwent further surgery or re-implantation of the device with no difference between the groups. At follow-up, five (45%) ABS and 10 (67%) SNS patients retained a functioning device (P = 0.4). The mean postoperative CCFFIS decreased from 17.5 to 11.5 in the RS group, from 18.7 to 8.6 in the ABS group, and from 17.6 to 9.1 in the SNS group (P ≤ 0.02 for all). There were no differences in the improvement of CCFFIS or FIQoL scores among groups.

CONCLUSION

RS, ABS and SNS are associated with similar improvements in continence after failed sphincteroplasty. Due to increased complications and re-operation with ABS and SNS, RS may be the first step in managing these patients.

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.

The SECCA procedure for faecal incontinence: a review

AIM

The SECCA system is a treatment option for patients with faecal incontinence and was introduced into clinical practice in 2002. Clinical studies of radiofrequency energy to treat patients with faecal incontinence have been published. This article aimed to review all published series to assess the results of this treatment.

METHOD

Twelve studies were included. Outcomes analysed included quality of life, the Wexner incontinence score, anorectal manometry and endoanal ultrasound findings.

RESULTS

A total of 220 patients from 10 studies were included. In the majority of clinical studies, the SECCA procedure has been shown to be an effective treatment of mild-to-moderate faecal incontinence.

CONCLUSION

When patient selection is appropriate, this treatment has demonstrated clinically significant improvements in symptoms, as demonstrated by statistically significant reductions in the Wexner incontinence and quality of life scores.

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.

Fecal incontinence in the elderly: FAQ

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a common gastrointestinal (GI) complaint in patients aged 65 years and older. This evidence-based review article discusses the epidemiology, pathophysiology, evaluation, and management of FI in the geriatric population. We emphasize aging-related changes leading to and impacting evaluation and treatment of this symptom while incorporating the core geriatric principles of functional status and management aligned with patient preference and goals of care.

Recent advances in functional anorectal disorders

Defecatory disorders are a common cause of chronic constipation and should be managed by biofeedback-guided pelvic floor retraining. While anorectal tests are necessary to diagnose defecatory disorders, recent studies highlight the utility of a careful digital rectal examination. While obstetric anal injury can cause fecal incontinence (FI), diarrhea is a more important risk factor for FI among women in the community, who typically develop FI after age 40. Initial management of fecal incontinence should focus on bowel disturbances. Pelvic floor retraining with biofeedback therapy is beneficial for patients who do not respond to bowel management. Sacral nerve stimulation should be considered in patients who do not respond to conservative therapy.