The use of Permacol® injections for the treatment of faecal incontinence

An evaluation of the long-term effectiveness of Gatekeeper™ intersphincteric implants for passive faecal incontinence

Background

Implantation of Gatekeeper™ prostheses presents an option for the treatment of passive faecal incontinence (FI). Whilst preliminary results are encouraging, long-term data regarding its sustained benefit are limited. The aim of this study was to assess and evaluate the long-term clinical function and quality of life of patients with passive faecal incontinence who were treated with Gatekeeper™ prostheses.

Methods

This was a single centre, single surgeon retrospective study of prospectively collected clinical data in patients with FI treated between June 2012 and May 2019. Patients with passive FI with symptoms refractory to conservative treatment and endoanal ultrasonography showing intact or disrupted internal anal sphincter were included. Formal clinical and quality of life assessments were carried out using the St. Mark’s Incontinence Score (SMIS) and Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life (FIQoL) questionnaires at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and then annually. Endoanal ultrasonography was performed both before and after surgery.

Results

Forty patients (14 males, 26 females) with a median age of 62.5 (range 33–80) years were treated with the Gatekeeper™ implant. The majority of patients (87.5%) received six implants. There were no peri or post-operative complications. Prosthesis migration was observed in 12.5% patients. The median follow-up duration was 5 years (interquartile range (IQR) 3.25–6.00 years). A sustained improvement in median SMIS and FIQoL scores from baseline to follow-up was noted. Significant differences were observed between the median baseline SMIS score and last follow-up score of 16.00 (IQR 15.00–16.75) to 7.00 (IQR 5.00–8.00) respectively (p < 0.001), a 56.25% decrease. The overall median FIQoL score showed a significant improvement from 7.95 (IQR 7.13–9.48) to 13.15 (IQR 12.00–13.98) (p < 0.001) a 65.40% increase.

Conclusions

Gatekeeper™ implantation is a safe approach to treating passive FI and is minimally invasive, reproducible and has minimal complications. Long-term sustained clinical improvement is achievable beyond 5 years. Careful patient selection is paramount, as is consistency of technique and follow-up protocol.

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.

Sacral neuromodulation compared with injection of bulking agents for faecal incontinence following obstetric anal sphincter injury - a randomized controlled trial

AIM

The purpose of this trial was to compare the effectiveness of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) with a submucosal injection of collagen (Permacol®) in women with faecal incontinence following obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS).

METHOD

This single-blinded randomized controlled trial at two hospital units in Norway included women with faecal incontinence following OASIS. Eligible women who had had a successful percutaneous nerve evaluation were randomly assigned to SNM or Permacol®. The primary outcome was the difference in the St Mark's incontinence score between baseline and 6 months. Secondary outcomes were changes in the disease-specific quality of life (FIQL) and urinary incontinence (ICIQ-UI-SF) scores.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight women were randomly assigned to SNM (n = 30) and Permacol® (n = 28). The reduction in the St Mark's score between baseline and 6 months was 11.2 (SD 5.3) in the SNM group vs 2.3 (SD 5.0) in the Permacol® group, resulting in a difference of 8.9 (95% CI: 6.1-11.7, P < 0.0001). The differences in the four scales of FIQL (lifestyle, coping, depression, embarrassment) were 0.90 (95% CI: 0.50-1.30, P < 0.001), 1.05 (0.62-1.47, P < 0.001), 0.52 (95% CI: 0.16-0.87, P = 0.005) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.50-1.40, P < 0.001), respectively, in favour of SNM. The difference in the ICIQ-UI-SF was 5.0 (95% CI: 1.97-8.02, P = 0.002) in favour of SNM. There were nine minor adverse events in the SNM group compared with seven in the Permacol® group (P = 0.77).

CONCLUSION

SNM was superior to Permacol® in terms of reduction of St Mark's score, ICIQ-UI-SF and the change of the FIQL in women with faecal incontinence following OASIS.

Midterm outcomes of injectable bulking agents for fecal incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Various bulking agents have been used to treat fecal incontinence. While short-term outcomes are attractive, there is still a lack of long-term data. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the midterm outcomes of treatment with injectable bulking agents and to identify predictive factors for improvement in incontinence.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched using the terms injection, bulking agents, and fecal incontinence. Studies with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. The improvement rate in incontinence was calculated by percent change in validated fecal incontinence score (FIS) following injection treatment. To explore the impact of predictive factors on improvement in incontinence, univariate meta-regressions were conducted using the random-effect model.

RESULTS

A total of 889 patients in 23 articles were included. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 23.7 months (95% CI 19.3-28.2). Eleven different bulking agents were used. Four validated FISs were used. The Cleveland Clinic Fecal Incontinence score (CC-FIS) was used in 19 studies. Most studies reported a statistically significant improvement in FIS. The pooled mean preoperative CC-FIS (n = 637) was 12.4 (95% CI 11.4-13.3). The pooled mean CC-FIS at last follow-up (n = 590) was 7.7 (95% CI 6.1-9.3). The weighted mean difference in CC-FIS between preoperative visit and last follow-up was 4.9 (95% CI 4.0-5.8). Hence, the rate of improvement in incontinence was 39.5% based on CC-FIS. Meta-regression revealed that the perianal injection route and implants intact on endoanal ultrasonography were predictive of greater improvement in incontinence. The manometric data revealed that the initial increase in the mean resting pressure following injection was attenuated over time. The pooled rate of adverse events was 18.0% (95% CI 10.0-30.1). In most cases, adverse events were minor and resolved within a couple of weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of injectable bulking agents results in significant midterm improvement in FIS. Perianal injection route and implants intact on EAUS were predictive of higher improvement in incontinence. However, given the paucity of randomized controlled trials in the literature, further research is needed to improve the quality of the evidence.

Safety and Efficacy of Permacol Injection in the Treatment of Fecal Incontinence

Purpose

Permacol has been gaining popularity in recent times for the treatment of fecal incontinence (FI). This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anal submucosal Permacol injection in the treatment of FI.

Methods

All consecutive patients who underwent Permacol injection for FI over a 3-year period were included. Patients' data relating to obstetric history, anorectal/pelvic operations, type of FI, preoperative anorectal physiology results and follow-up details for outcome measures were collected. Preoperative and postoperative Cleveland Clinic Florida Incontinence Scores (CCFISs) were noted. Patients were surveyed by using a telephone questionnaire to assess the quality of life and other outcome measures. Data were analysed using SPSS ver.19.0.

Results

Thirty patients (28 females and 2 males) with a median age of 67 years were included in the study. Of those patients, 37%, 50%, and 13% were noted to have passive, mixed and urge FI, respectively. Six of the patients (20%) had repeat Permacol injections, 5 of whom had sustained responses to the first Permacol injection for a mean of 11 months. There was a significant improvement in the CCFIS from a baseline median of 12.5, mean 12.8 interquartile range [IQR], 6–20), to a median of 3.5, mean 4.8 (IQR, 0–20), P < 0.001. Of the patients surveyed by telephone 89% were satisfied with their overall experience and the improvement in their symptoms following Permacol injections.

Conclusion

This study has demonstrated that Permacol injection for the treatment of FI is safe and effective and has no associated major complications. However, the results are not permanent; consequently, a significant proportion of the patients with an initial response may require repeat injections.