Sacral nerve stimulation in patients with severe fecal incontinence after rectal resection

Managing Bowel Symptoms After Sphincter-Saving Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Scoping Review

CONTEXT

Rectal cancer is common and it is often treated by surgery with or without chemoradiation. Cancer treatment frequently results in bowel symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

The review aim was to chart the management options for bowel symptoms following rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

A scoping review was undertaken searching nine healthcare databases, using relevant search terms and Boolean operators following PRISMA-ScR guidance. Data were extracted into an Excel spreadsheet using headings from the United Kingdom Department of Health guidance and are reported narratively.

RESULTS

30 heterogeneous studies met the inclusion criteria, including 853 patients. The most commonly reported bowel symptom was fecal incontinence; the most frequent management strategy was sacral nerve stimulation. Most studies reported on a single management option, often used to manage more than one bowel symptom. Often failure to satisfactorily improve symptoms using options such as medication was needed prior to progressing to other management options. In some studies more than one management option was used, such as rehabilitation programmes.

CONCLUSION

It is likely that to effectively manage the bowel symptoms experienced after rectal cancer treatment, more than one management option may be used-. Additionally, different management options may need to be tried concurrently.

Optimising functional outcomes in rectal cancer surgery

Background

By improved surgical technique such as total mesorectal excision (TME), multimodal treatment and advances in imaging survival and an increased rate of sphincter preservation have been achieved in rectal cancer surgery. Minimal-invasive approaches such as laparoscopic, robotic and transanal-TME (ta-TME) enhance recovery after surgery. Nevertheless, disorders of bowel, anorectal and urogenital function are still common and need attention.

Purpose

This review aims at exploring the causes of dysfunction after anterior resection (AR) and the accordingly preventive strategies. Furthermore, the indication for low AR in the light of functional outcome is discussed. The last therapeutic strategies to deal with bowel, anorectal, and urogenital disorders are depicted.

Conclusion

Functional disorders after rectal cancer surgery are frequent and underestimated. More evidence is needed to define an indication for non-operative management or local excision as alternatives to AR. The decision for restorative resection should be made in consideration of the relevant risk factors for dysfunction. In the case of restoration, a side-to-end anastomosis should be the preferred anastomotic technique. Further high-evidence clinical studies are required to clarify the benefit of intraoperative neuromonitoring. While the function of ta-TME seems not to be superior to laparoscopy, case-control studies suggest the benefits of robotic TME mainly in terms of preservation of the urogenital function. Low AR syndrome is treated by stool regulation, pelvic floor therapy, and transanal irrigation. There is good evidence for sacral nerve modulation for incontinence after low AR.

The efficacy of sacral neuromodulation in the treatment of low anterior resection syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) has become one of the main treatment options in patients with fecal incontinence. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of sacral neuromodulation in the treatment of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The search was conducted using the Pubmed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane databases, restricted to the English language and to articles published from 2000 to November 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 434 articles on the efficacy of SNM in the treatment of LARS were retrieved, and 13 studies were included in the final analysis, with a total of 114 patients treated with SNM for LARS The overall success rate excluding study heterogeneity was 83.30% [95% CI (71.33-95.25%)]. Improvement in anal continence was seen in several clinical and functional parameters, including the Wexner Score [10.78 points, 95% CI (8.55-13.02), p < 0.0001], manometric maximum resting pressure [mean improvement of 6.37 mm/Hg, 95% CI (2.67-10.07), p = 0.0007], maximum squeeze pressure [mean improvement of 17.99 mm/Hg, 95% CI (17.42-18.56), p < 0.0001] and maximum tolerated volume [mean improvement of 22.74 ml, 95% CI (10.65-34.83), p = 0.0002]. Quality of life questionnaires also demonstrated significant improvement in patients' quality of life, but were reported only in a small group of included patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SNM significantly improves symptoms and quality of life in patients suffering from fecal incontinence following low anterior resection.

Sacral nerve stimulation for bowel dysfunction following low anterior resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) can affect up to 70% of all patients with rectal cancer. In the last two decades, sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) has emerged as an effective treatment for faecal incontinence. There is some encouraging literature on the use of SNS in patients with LARS. The purpose of this review is to provide an up to date review on the utility of SNS on LARS.

METHOD

A literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed databases (January 1981-March 2019). Studies identified were appraised with standard selection criteria. Data points were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

RESULTS

Ten studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this study. All studies used the Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS), whereas the low anterior resection syndrome score (LARS score) was used in three studies. Overall median improvement in the scoring system was 67.0% (range 35.5%-88.2%) after SNS implantation. There was a significant reduction in CCIS after SNS implantation (mean difference 11.23, 95% confidence interval 9.38-13.07, Z = 11.90, P < 0.00001). The LARS score was also significantly reduced after using SNS in patients with LARS (mean difference 17.87, 95% confidence interval 10.15-25.59, Z = 4.54, P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Use of SNS may provide symptomatic benefits for patients with LARS refractory to medical therapy. However, the current level of evidence remains limited. A large multicentre study of SNS for LARS using the validated LARS score is warranted. In addition, the cost-effectiveness of SNS for patients with LARS needs further exploration.

Recommendations for follow-up of colorectal cancer survivors

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the tumours with the highest incidence and mortality in the Spanish population. Nevertheless, the advances in prevention and treatment have contributed to an increased number of patients who survive for prolonged periods of time. In addition, despite recurrences, improved survival following metastasis resection is likewise on the rise. This underscores the importance of carrying out follow-up programmes even in low-risk patients for the early detection of recurrence. The main objective of this article is to provide a set of recommendations for optimising the follow-up of CRC survivors as well as for managing the sequelae that result from either pharmacological or surgical treatment.

Using sacral nerve modulation to improve continence and quality of life in patients suffering from low anterior resection syndrome

BACKGROUND

Sphincter preserving surgery for the treatment of rectal cancer is very often feasible, avoiding a permanent colostomy. It is well recognized that a large proportion of patients will experience altered bowel habit following low anterior resection (LAR). Faecal incontinence is a common symptom associated with LAR syndrome. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term improvement in continence and quality of life (QoL) in LAR patients treated with sacral nerve modulation.

METHODS

Patients with ongoing faecal incontinence for >1 year after reversal of diverting ileostomy post ultra-LAR were selected for the study. Eligible patients underwent sacral nerve modulator implantation as a two-stage procedure. Bowel diaries and the Cleveland Clinic Faecal Incontinence Score were used to measure faecal incontinence and QoL.

RESULTS

Twelve patients underwent permanent implantation of a sacral nerve stimulator. Median follow-up was 34 months (interquartile range (IQR) 20.25-62.5 months). The median improvement in faecal incontinence was 90% (IQR 76.25-98.75%) and the median improvement in patient QoL was 80% (IQR 71.25-93.75%). Patients who had previously been treated with biofeedback showed a median improvement in incontinence of 75% compared to 90% which was found in patients who had not had prior biofeedback treatment. The mean percentage improvement in patients with an internal anal sphincter defect was 80% compared to 90% seen in patients with an intact sphincter.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that sacral nerve modulation should be more widely considered as an effective treatment strategy for patients with faecal incontinence following LAR.

Treatment possibilities for low anterior resection syndrome: a review of the literature

AIM

Up to 80% of patients after low anterior resection, experience (low) anterior resection syndrome (ARS/LARS). However, there is no standard treatment option currently available. This systemic review aims to summarize treatment possibilities for LARS after surgical treatment of rectal cancer in the medical literature.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched using the terms anterior resection syndrome, low anterior resection, colorectal/rectal/rectum, surgery/operation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, biofeedback, transanal irrigation, sacral nerve stimulation, and tibial nerve stimulation. All English language articles presenting original patient data regarding treatment and outcome of LARS were included. We focused on the effects of different treatment modalities for LARS. The Jadad score was used to assess the methodological quality of trials. The quality scale ranges from 0 to 5 points, with a score ≤ 2 indicating a low quality report, and a score of ≥ 3 indicating a high quality report.

RESULTS

Twenty-one of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 8 were reporting sacral nerve stimulation, 6 were designed to determine pelvic floor rehabilitation, 3 studies evaluated the effect of transanal irrigation, 2-percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, and the rest of the studies assessed probiotics and 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists for LARS in patients who had undergone rectal resection. All except one study were poor quality reports according to the Jadad score.

CONCLUSIONS

LARS treatment still carries difficulties because of a lack of well-conducted, randomized multicenter trials. Well-performed randomized controlled trials are needed.

Sacral nerve stimulation can be an effective treatment for low anterior resection syndrome

AIM

Sacral nerve stimulation has become a preferred method for the treatment of faecal incontinence in patients who fail conservative (non-operative) therapy. In previous small studies, sacral nerve stimulation has demonstrated improvement of faecal incontinence and quality of life in a majority of patients with low anterior resection syndrome. We evaluated the efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation in the treatment of low anterior resection syndrome using a recently developed and validated low anterior resection syndrome instrument to quantify symptoms.

METHOD

A retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing sacral nerve stimulation for the treatment of low anterior resection syndrome was performed. Procedures took place in the Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery at two academic tertiary medical centres. Pre- and post-treatment Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Scores and Low Anterior Resection Syndrome scores were assessed.

RESULTS

Twelve patients (50% men) suffering from low anterior resection syndrome with a mean age of 67.8 (±10.8) years underwent sacral nerve test stimulation. Ten patients (83%) proceeded to permanent implantation. Median time from anterior resection to stimulator implant was 16 (range 5-108) months. At a median follow-up of 19.5 (range 4-42) months, there were significant improvements in Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Scores and Low Anterior Resection Syndrome scores (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Sacral nerve stimulation improved symptoms in patients suffering from low anterior resection syndrome and may therefore be a viable treatment option.

Sacral nerve stimulation can alleviate symptoms of bowel dysfunction after colorectal resections

AIM

Poor functional results, such as faecal incontinence (FI), low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) or high stool frequency, can occur after colorectal resections, including proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA), rectal resection and left hemicolectomy. Management of such patients is problematic, and some case reports have demonstrated the effectiveness of sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) in these situations. Our aim was to analyse the effectiveness of SNS on poor functional results and on quality of life in patients after treatment with different types of colorectal resection.

METHOD

At five university hospitals from 2006 to 2014, patients with poor functional results after rectal resection, IPAA or left hemicolectomy underwent a staged SNS implant procedure. Failure was defined by the absence or insufficient improvement (< 50%) of FI episodes.

RESULTS

SNS for bowel dysfunction was performed in 16 patients after rectal resection with coloanal anastomosis, left hemicolectomy with colorectal anastomosis or IPAA. Two (13%) cases of primary failure were observed after the percutaneous stimulation test. Median frequency of stool, FI episodes and urgency were significantly improved in 14 patients. Wexner and LARS scores were also significantly improved for 14 patients. When we compared results according to the type of colorectal surgery (IPAA, rectal resection or left hemicolectomy), median frequencies of stool and urgency, Wexner and LARS scores were still significantly improved. Overall success rate was 75% (12/16 patients) in intention-to-treat analysis and 86% (12/14 patients with permanent electrode) in per-protocol analysis.

CONCLUSION

SNS seems to improve bowel dysfunction following rectal resection, left hemicolectomy or IPAA.

Sacral neuromodulation for the treatment of faecal incontinence following proctectomy

AIM

This study assessed the effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) for faecal incontinence (FI) following proctectomy with colorectal or coloanal anastomosis.

METHODS

An Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved database identified patients treated for FI following proctectomy (SNM-P) for benign or malignant disease, who were matched 1:1 according to preoperative Cleveland Clinic Florida Faecal Incontinence Scores (CCF-FIS) with patients without proctectomy (SNM-NP). Primary outcome was change in CCF-FIS.

RESULTS

Twelve patients (seven women) were in the SNM-P group and 12 (all women) were in the SNM-NP group. In the SNM-P group, six patients underwent proctectomy for low rectal cancer and five received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Five patients had handsewn anastomosis, and one had stapled coloanal anastomosis. One lead explantation occurred after a failed 2-week SNM percutaneous trial. Six patients underwent proctectomy for benign conditions. Within-group analyses revealed significant improvement in CCF-FIS in the SNM-P group (reduction from a score of 18 to a score of 14; P = 0.02), which was more profound for benign disease (reduction from 14.5 to 8.5) than for rectal cancer (reduction from 19.5 to 15). SNM was explanted in 66% and 33% of patients after proctectomy for malignant and benign conditions, respectively. In the SNM-NP group, 41% underwent overlapping sphincteroplasty. One patient received chemoradiation for anal cancer. Within-group analysis for the SNM-NP group showed significant improvement in CCF-FIS (a reduction from 17.5 to 4.0; P = 0.003). There was significant improvement in CCF-FIS in patients without previous proctectomy (mean delta CCF-FIS: 11.1 vs 4.7; P = 0.011). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) reaffirmed that controls outperformed proctectomy patients (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

SNM for FI after proctectomy appears less effective than SNM in patients without proctectomy, with high device explantation rates, particularly after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and proctectomy for low rectal cancer.

Sacral neurostimulation for low anterior resection syndrome after radical resection for rectal cancer: evaluation of treatment with the LARS score

PURPOSE

Sacral neurostimulation (SNS) has proven to be an effective treatment modality for low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). The primary aim of this study is to investigate the impact of SNS on all symptoms of LARS, not merely on fecal incontinence. Furthermore, we wanted to evaluate whether the LARS score could be useful as a tool to evaluate SNS treatment.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with minor or major LARS, unresponsive to conservative therapy for fecal incontinence, who underwent sacral neuromodulation for LARS at Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium, were prospectively enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was the reduction in the severity of LARS. This was assessed by validated questionnaires: the LARS score and the Wexner score.

RESULTS

Eleven patients underwent definite implantation of the SNS device. All patients showed a substantial decrease in their Wexner scores: The mean score was reduced from 17.7 to 4.6 (Z: 2.93; p: 0.0033). Additionally, the mean LARS score dropped from 36.9 to 11.4 (Z: 2.93; p: 0.0033). Furthermore, there was a significant amelioration of all symptoms of LARS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that SNS is effective for all symptoms of LARS. The authors believe that in patients who receive SNS for LARS, it could be useful to determine the LARS score to evaluate the complexity of the symptoms and their response to treatment.

The functional results of radical rectal cancer surgery: review of the literature

Introduction For more than the last 20 years, low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) is a gold standard for rectal cancer treatment. Oncological outcomes have improved significantly and now more and more reports of functional outcomes appear. Due to the close relationship between the rectum and pelvic nerves, bowel, bladder, and sexual function are frequently affected during TME. Methods A search for published data was performed using the MEDLINE database (from 1 January 2005 to 31 January 2015) to perform a systematic review of the studies that described anorectal, bladder, and sexual dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the MINORS criteria. Results Eighty-nine studies were eligible for analysis. Up to 76% of patients undergoing sphincter preserving surgery will have changes in bowel habits, the so-called "low anterior resection syndrome" (LARS). The duration of LARS varies between a few months and several years. Pre-operative radiotherapy, damage of anal sphincter and pelvic nerves, and height of the anastomosis are the risk factors for LARS. There is no evidence-based treatment available for LARS. Sexual function is more commonly affected after rectal surgery than after urinary function. The main cause of dysfunction is damage to pelvic nerves. Sexual and bladder functional outcomes in females are less well reported. Laparoscopic and robotic surgery allows better visualization of autonomic nerves and, therefore, more precise dissection and preservation. Conclusions It is important that rectal resection is standardized as much as possible, and that new functional outcome research use the same validated outcome questionnaires. This would allow for a high-quality meta-analysis.

A review of sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence following rectal surgery and radiotherapy

AIM

Faecal incontinence may occur following rectal surgery and/or radiotherapy for rectal cancer. The aim of this paper was to review the evidence to support the use of sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) for patients with incontinence who had undergone rectal surgery or received rectal radiotherapy.

METHOD

A search was performed of PubMed, Medline and Embase. All studies which reported the outcome of SNS in patients who had undergone a rectal resection or radiotherapy were reviewed.

RESULTS

The first report of SNS following rectal surgery was in 2002. Since then seven further studies have described its effect in patients who have undergone anterior resection or pelvic radiotherapy. The total number of patients was 57. All studies were single group series, which ranged in size from one to 15 patients. The follow-up ranged from 1 to 36 months. The success of peripheral nerve evaluation ranged from 47% to 100%. Permanent SNS improved the symptoms and in some studies this was reflected in improved quality of life. The wide variation of patient factors, operations performed, the dose of radiotherapy given and time from operation makes interpretation of the results difficult.

CONCLUSION

Larger studies with better patient selection are needed to investigate the effect of SNS on incontinence following radiotherapy or rectal surgery.

A systematic review of sacral nerve stimulation for low anterior resection syndrome

AIM

The efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) in low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is largely undocumented. A review of the literature was carried out to study this question.

METHOD

Pubmed, Medline and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant articles up to August 2014. Studies were included if they evaluated the use of SNS following rectal resection and assessed at least one of the following end-points: bowel function, quality of life and ano-neorectal physiology. No restrictions on language or study size were made.

RESULTS

Seven papers were identified including one case report and six prospective case series. These included 43 patients with a median follow-up of 15 months. After peripheral nerve evaluation definitive implantation was carried out in 34 (79.1%) patients. Overall, 32 (94.1%) of the 34 patients experienced improvement of symptoms which, based on intention to treat, was 32/43 (74.4%).

CONCLUSION

The review suggests that SNS for faecal incontinence in LARS has success rates comparable to its use for other forms of faecal incontinence.

Diagnosis and treatment of faecal incontinence: Consensus statement of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery and the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists

Faecal incontinence is a common and disturbing condition, which leads to impaired quality of life and huge social and economic costs. Although recent studies have identified novel diagnostic modalities and therapeutic options, the best diagnostic and therapeutic approach is not yet completely known and shared among experts in this field. The Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery and the Italian Association of Hospital Gastroenterologists selected a pool of experts to constitute a joint committee on the basis of their experience in treating pelvic floor disorders. The aim was to develop a position paper on the diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of faecal incontinence, to provide practical recommendations for a cost-effective diagnostic work-up and a tailored treatment strategy. The recommendations were defined and graded on the basis of levels of evidence in accordance with the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, and were based on currently published scientific evidence. Each statement was drafted through constant communication and evaluation conducted both online and during face-to-face working meetings. A brief recommendation at the end of each paragraph allows clinicians to find concise responses to each diagnostic and therapeutic issue.

Sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence and constipation: a European consensus statement

AIM

In Europe during the last decade sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) or sacral neuromodulation (SNM) has been used to treat faecal incontinence (FI) and constipation. Despite this, there is little consensus on baseline investigations, patient selection and operative technique. A modified Delphi process was conducted to seek consensus on the current practice of SNS/SNM for FI and constipation.

METHOD

A systematic literature search of SNS for FI and constipation was conducted using PubMed. A set of questions derived from the search and expert opinion were answered on-line on two occasions by an international panel of specialists from Europe. A 1-day face-to-face meeting of the experts finalized the discussion.

RESULTS

Three hundred and ninety-three articles were identified from the literature search, of which 147 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two specialists in FI and constipation from Europe participated. Agreement was achieved on 43 (86%) of 50 domains including the set-up of service, patient selection, baseline investigations, operative technique and programming of the device. The median of agreement was 95% (35-100%).

CONCLUSION

Consensus was achieved on the majority of domains of SNS/SNM for FI and constipation. This should serve as a benchmark for safe and quality practice of SNS/SNM in Europe.

Sacral neuromodulation and peripheral nerve stimulation in patients with anal incontinence: an overview of techniques, complications and troubleshooting

Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) therapy has revolutionized the management of many forms of anal incontinence, with an expanded use and a medium-term efficacy of 75% overall. This review discusses the technique of SNM therapy, along with its complications and troubleshooting and a discussion of the early data pertaining to peripheral posterior tibial nerve stimulation in incontinent patients. Future work needs to define the predictive factors for neurostimulatory success, along with the likely mechanisms of action of their therapeutic action.

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS): cause and effect and reconstructive considerations

Between 25 and 80% of patients undergoing a low or very low anterior resection will suffer postoperatively, from a constellation of symptoms including fecal urgency, frequent bowel movements, bowel fragmentation and incontinence, collectively referred to as the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). The etiology of LARS is multifactorial with the potential of sphincter injury during anastomosis construction, alterations in anorectal physiology, the development of a pudendal neuropathy, and a lumbar plexopathy with exacerbation of symptoms if there is associated anastomotic sepsis or the use of adjuvant and neoadjuavnt therapies. The symptoms of LARS may be obviated in part by the construction of a neorectal reservoir which may take the form of a colonic J-pouch, a transverse coloplasty, or a side-to-end anastomosis. This review outlines the factors contributing to LARS symptomatology along with the short- and medium-term functional results of comparative trials with the different types of neorectal reconstructions.