Perineal retraining improves conservative treatment for faecal incontinence: a multicentre randomized study

Risk Factors for Anal Continence Impairment Following a Second Delivery after a First Traumatic Delivery: A Prospective Cohort Study

Postpartum anal incontinence is common. After a first delivery (D1) with perineal trauma, follow-up is advised to reduce the risk of anal incontinence. Endoanal sonography (EAS) may be considered to evaluate the sphincter and in case of sphincter lesions to discuss cesarean section for the second delivery (D2). Our objective was to study the risk factors for anal continence impairment following D2. Women with a history of traumatic D1 were followed before and 6 months after D2. Continence was measured using the Vaizey score. An increase ≥2 points after D2 defined a significant deterioration. A total of 312 women were followed and 67 (21%) had worse anal continence after D2. The main risk factors for this deterioration were the presence of urinary incontinence and the combined use of instruments and episiotomy during D2 (OR 5.12, 95% CI 1.22-21.5). After D1, 192 women (61.5%) had a sphincter rupture revealed by EAS, whereas it was diagnosed clinically in only 48 (15.7%). However, neither clinically undiagnosed ruptures nor severe ruptures were associated with an increased risk of continence deterioration after D2, and cesarean section did not protect against it. One woman out of five in this population had anal continence impairment after D2. The main risk factor was instrumental delivery. Caesarean section was not protective. Although EAS enabled the diagnosis of clinically-missed sphincter ruptures, these were not associated with continence impairment. Anal incontinence should be systematically screened in patients presenting urinary incontinence after D2 as they are frequently associated.

Pelvic Floor Rehabilitation After Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial (FORCE Trial)

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of PFR after LAR compared to usual care without PFR.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Functional complaints, including fecal incontinence, often occur after LAR for rectal cancer. Controversy exists about the effectiveness of PFR in improving such postoperative functional outcomes.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial involving 17 Dutch centers. Patients after LAR for rectal cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to usual care or PFR and stratified by sex and administration of neoadjuvant therapy. Selection was not based on severity of complaints at baseline. Baseline measurements were taken 3 months after surgery without temporary stoma construction or 6 weeks after stoma closure. The primary outcome measure was the change in Wexner incontinence scores 3 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes were fecal incontinence-related quality of life, colorectal-specific quality of life, and the LARS scores.

RESULTS

Between October 2017 and March 2020, 128 patients were enrolled and 106 randomly assigned (PFR n = 51, control n = 55); 95 patients (PFR n = 44, control n = 51) were assessable for final analysis. PFR did not lead to larger changes in Wexner incontinence scores in nonselected patients after LAR compared to usual care [PFR: -2.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.3 to -1.4, control: -1.3, 95% CI -2.2 to -0.4, P = 0.13]. However, PFR was associated with less urgency at follow-up (odds ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.86). Patients without near-complete incontinence reported larger Wexner score improvements after PFR (PFR: -2.1, 95% CI -3.1 to -1.1, control: -0.7, 95% CI -1.6 to 0.2, P = 0.045). For patients with at least moderate incontinence PFR resulted in relevant improvements in all fecal incontinence-related quality of life domains, while the control group deteriorated. These improvements were even larger when patients with near-complete incontinence were excluded. No serious adverse PFR-related events occurred.

CONCLUSION

No benefit was found of PFR in all patients but several subgroups were identified that did benefit from PFR, such as patients with urgency or with at least moderate incontinence and no near-complete incontinence. A selective referral policy (65%-85% of all patients) is suggested to improve postoperative functional outcomes for patients after LAR for rectal cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registration, NTR5469, registered on 3 September 2015.

Factors Associated With Response to Anorectal Biofeedback Therapy in Patients With Fecal Incontinence

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Anorectal biofeedback (BF) is commonly used to treat patients with fecal incontinence (FI), but demand usually exceeds availability. It is therefore important to identify patients most likely to respond to BF treatment. We aimed to identify pre-treatment clinical or physiologic factors that might be used to predict completion and success of BF in women with FI.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 400 women with FI (mean age, 61 ± 14 y) undergoing instrumental BF in a tertiary care setting from 2003 through 2016. All patients completed questionnaires before BF, including Rome and the hospital anxiety and depression scale questionnaires. Histories of medication use, surgery, medical conditions, and bowel pattern were recorded, urge was assessed, and patients kept stool diaries. Before and after treatment (6 weekly sessions with a gastroenterologist-supervised nurse specialist, 4 involving instrumented anorectal biofeedback), patients were examined by a physician and fecal incontinence severity index and visual analogue scale scores were recorded. The main outcome measure was response to therapy, defined as improvement of 50% or more in weekly FI episodes at the end of BF compared with before BF.

RESULTS

The BF treatment was completed by 363 women (91%); of these, 62 had low baseline symptom frequency (no FI episodes in the 2 weeks before BF). Younger age was associated with failure to complete treatment. Of the 301 patients remaining, 202 patients (67%) had a response to therapy; among these women, urge FI was associated with response at end of BF, but not at follow up (6 months after therapy). Baseline severity of symptom scores and quality of life measures were associated with greater improvement in the same variable at the end of BF and after 6 months. Patients with low baseline symptom frequency improved in all secondary outcome measures, similar to patients with higher baseline symptom frequency.

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of 363 women with FI, approximately two-thirds had a response to BF treatment. Urge FI was the only baseline variable associated with response. Baseline severity of symptoms and quality of life measures were associated with greater improvement in the same variable, but not overall response. It is therefore a challenge to select treatment for patients with FI.

Nurse- and Pelvic Floor Physical Therapist-Led Bowel Training in Patients With Fecal Incontinence in a Tertiary Care Center

Little is known about nurse- and pelvic floor physical therapist-led bowel training in fecal incontinence after previous conservative management has been deemed unsatisfactory. The objective of this study was to evaluate combined nurse- and physical therapist-led bowel training sessions in a tertiary care center. This was a prospective, cross-sectional study. All patients with fecal incontinence between 2015 and 2016 with and without previous conservative management were included. Combined conservative treatment was defined as the use of stool-bulking agents (psyllium fibers) with or without antidiarrheal medication (loperamide) in combination with biofeedback or pelvic floor muscle training. Questionnaires regarding fecal incontinence (Vaizey incontinence score) and quality of life (Short Form Health Survey-36) were used. A decrease in the Vaizey incontinence score of 5 or more points was deemed to be clinically significant. Vaizey incontinence scores in all 50 patients decreased from 14.7 (SD = 4.5) to 9.9 (SD = 4.8) at follow-up (p < .001). Forty percent of patients reported an improvement in their Vaizey incontinence score (change of 5 or more points). Improvement was noted in those with and without previous treatment. Quality of life improved significantly. The limitation of the study includes lack of a standardized treatment protocol. Fecal incontinence reduced after nurse- and physical therapist-led bowel training sessions in patients with and without previous treatment, increasing their quality of life.

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.

Pelvic floor rehabilitation to improve functional outcome and quality of life after surgery for rectal cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (FORCE trial)

BACKGROUND

After low anterior resection (LAR), up to 90% of patients develop anorectal dysfunction. Especially fecal incontinence has a major impact on the physical, psychological, social, and emotional functioning of the patient but also on the Dutch National Healthcare budget with more than €2000 spent per patient per year. No standardized treatment is available to help these patients. Common treatment nowadays is focused on symptom relief, consisting of lifestyle advices and pharmacotherapy with bulking agents or antidiarrheal medication. Another possibility is pelvic floor rehabilitation (PFR), which is one of the most important treatments for fecal incontinence in general, with success rates of 50-80%. No strong evidence is available for the use of PFR after LAR. This study aims to prove a beneficial effect of PFR on fecal incontinence, quality of life, and costs in rectal cancer patients after sphincter-saving surgery compared to standard treatment.

METHODS

The FORCE trial is a multicenter, two-armed, randomized clinical trial. All patients that underwent LAR are recruited from the participating hospitals and randomized for either standard treatment or a standardized PFR program. A total of 128 patients should be randomized. Optimal blinding is not possible. Stratification will be done in variable blocks (gender and additional radiotherapy). The primary endpoint is the Wexner incontinence score; secondary endpoints are health-related and fecal-incontinence-related QoL and cost-effectiveness. Baseline measurements take place before randomization. The primary endpoint is measured 3 months after the start of the intervention, with a 1-year follow-up for sustainability research purposes.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study may substantially improve postoperative care for patients with fecal incontinence or anorectal dysfunction after LAR. This section provides insight in the decisions that were made in the organization of this trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registration, NTR5469, registered on 03-09-2015. Protocol FORCE trial V18, 19-09-2019. Sponsor Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen.

Efficacy of Supervised Pelvic Floor Muscle Training and Biofeedback vs Attention-Control Treatment in Adults With Fecal Incontinence

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) in combination with conservative treatment is recommended as first-line treatment for patients with fecal incontinence, although its efficacy is unclear. We investigated whether supervised PFMT in combination with conservative treatment is superior to attention-control massage treatment and conservative treatment in adults with fecal incontinence.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, controlled, superiority trial of patients with fecal incontinence at a tertiary care center at a public hospital in Denmark. Ninety-eight adults with fecal incontinence were randomly assigned to groups that received supervised PFMT and biofeedback plus conservative treatment or attention-control treatment plus conservative treatment. The primary outcome was rating of symptom changes, after 16 weeks, based on scores from the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale. Secondary outcomes were changes in the Vaizey incontinence score (Vaizey Score), Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, and Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale.

RESULTS

In the intention-to-treat analysis, participants in the PFMT group were significantly more likely to report improvement in incontinence symptoms based on Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale scores (unadjusted odds ratio, 5.16; 95% CI, 2.18-12.19; P = .0002). The PFMT group had a larger reduction in the mean Vaizey Score (reduction, -1.83 points; 95% CI, -3.57 to -0.08; P = .04). There were no significant differences in condition-specific quality of life. In the per-protocol analyses, the superiority of PFMT was increased. No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized controlled trial of adults with fecal incontinence provides support for a superior effect of supervised PFMT in combination with conservative treatment compared with attention-control massage treatment and conservative treatment. We found that participants who received supervised PFMT had 5-fold higher odds of reporting improvements in fecal incontinence symptoms and had a larger mean reduction of incontinence severity based on the Vaizey Score compared with attention control massage treatment. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT01705535.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing treatments for faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Although numerous treatments exist for fecal incontinence (FI), no consensus exists on the best treatment strategy. The aim was to review the literature and to compare the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of treatments available for FI.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

A systematic literature review was performed, from inception to May 2018, of the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, Cochrane Library. The search terms used were "faecal incontinence" and "treatment". Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatments for FI were considered. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method.

RESULT

Forty-seven RCTs were included comparing 37 treatments and reporting on 3748 participants. No treatment ranked best or worst with high probability for any outcome of interest. No significant difference was identified between treatments for frequency of FI per week, or in changing the resting pressure, maximum resting pressure, squeeze pressure, and maximum squeeze pressure. Radiofrequency resulted in more adverse events compared to placebo. Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) and zinc-aluminium improved the fecal incontinence quality of life questionnaire (FIQL) lifestyle, coping, and embarrassment domains compared to placebo. Transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (TPTNS) improved the FIQL embarrassment domain compared to placebo. Autologous myoblasts and zinc-aluminium improved the FIQL depression domain compared to placebo. SNS, artificial bowel sphincter (ABS), and zinc-aluminium significantly improved incontinence scores compared to placebo. Injection of non-animal stabilized hyaluronic acid/dextranomer (NASHA/Dx) resulted in more patients with ≥50% reduction in FI episodes compared to placebo.

CONCLUSION

SNS, ABS, TPTNS, NASHA/Dx, zinc-aluminium, and autologous myoblasts resulted in isolated improvements in specific outcomes of interest. No difference was identified in incontinence episodes, no treatment ranked best persistently or persistently improved outcomes, and many included treatments did not significantly benefit patients compared to placebo. Large multicentre RCTs with long-term follow-up and standardized inclusion criteria and outcome measures are needed.

A systematic review of the literature reporting on randomised controlled trials comparing treatments for faecal incontinence in adults

AIM

To perform a review of the literature reporting on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatments for faecal incontinence (FI) in adults.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane was performed in order to identify RCTs reporting on treatments for FI.

RESULTS

The review included 60 RCTs reporting on 4838 patients with a mean age ranging from 36.8 to 88 years. From the included RCTs, 32 did not identify a significant difference between the treatments compared. Contradictory results were identified in RCTs comparing percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation and transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation versus sham stimulation, biofeedback-pelvic floor muscle training (BF-PFMT) versus PFMT, and between bulking agents such as PTQ^TM versus Durasphere^®. In two separate RCTs, combination treatment of amplitude-modulated medium frequency stimulation and electromyography-biofeedback (EMG-BF), was noted to be superior to EMG-BF and low-frequency electrical stimulation alone. Combination of non-surgical treatments such as BF with sphincteroplasty significantly improved continence scores compared to sphincteroplasty alone. Surgical treatments were associated with higher rates of serious adverse events compared to non-surgical interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence has not identified significant differences between treatments for FI, and where differences were identified, the results were contradictory between RCTs.

Supervised pelvic floor muscle training versus attention-control massage treatment in patients with faecal incontinence: Statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled trial

Introduction

Faecal incontinence affects approximately 8–9% of the adult population. The condition is surrounded by taboo; it can have a devastating impact on quality of life and lead to major limitations in daily life. Pelvic floor muscle training in combination with information and fibre supplements is recommended as first-line treatment for faecal incontinence. Despite this, the effect of pelvic floor muscle training for faecal incontinence is unclear. No previous trials have investigated the efficacy of supervised pelvic floor muscle training in combination with conservative treatment and compared this to an attention-control massage treatment including conservative treatment. The aim of this trial is to investigate if 16 weeks of supervised pelvic floor muscle training in combination with conservative treatment is superior to attention-control massage treatment and conservative treatment in patients with faecal incontinence.

Design

Randomised, controlled, superiority trial with two parallel arms.

Methods

100 participants with faecal incontinence will be randomised to either (1) individually supervised pelvic floor muscle training and conservative treatment or (2) attention-control massage treatment and conservative treatment. The primary outcome is participants' rating of symptom changes after 16 weeks of treatment using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement Scale. Secondary outcomes are the Vaizey Incontinence Score, the Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale, a 14-day bowel diary, anorectal manometry and rectal capacity measurements. Follow-up assessment at 36 months will be conducted.

Discussion

This paper describes and discusses the rationale, the methods and in particular the statistical analysis plan of this trial.

Patient preferences for endpoints in fecal incontinence treatment studies

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials of treatments for fecal incontinence (FI) are difficult to compare because case definitions and study endpoints vary. Our aims were to assess patient perspectives on the case definition for FI and how treatment success should be measured.

METHODS

In Phase 1, 28 FI patients participated in anonymous on-line focus groups, and in Phase 2, 186 people with FI, stratified by gender, race, and age completed an online survey.

KEY RESULTS

Focus group participants described frequency and urgency as the most important characteristics for defining FI. Most (80%) thought staining of underwear constitutes FI, but only 33% thought gas leakage was FI. When asked how the success of treatment should be defined, 77% said by a reduction in frequency or complete cure, but less than half thought a 50% reduction in frequency was enough. When asked how much reduction would be needed, responses averaged 80%. The Phase 2 survey confirmed that frequency, urgency, and intestinal discomfort are the most important characteristics for case definition, and that success should be defined by at least a 75% decrease in frequency. A 50% reduction was an acceptable endpoint for 58% overall but only 26% for those aged ≥65. "Adequate relief" was acceptable to 78%.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Inclusion criteria for trials should specify a minimum frequency of FI. Most patients would require a ≥75% reduction in FI frequency to call a treatment successful but young adults and those with more severe FI would accept a ≥50% reduction as meaningful.

Efficacy of anorectal biofeedback in scleroderma patients with fecal incontinence: a case-control study

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether anorectal biofeedback therapy can improve the symptoms of fecal incontinence (FI) in patients with scleroderma when compared to patients with functional FI, and also whether there is any effect on anorectal physiology or quality of life (QOL). FI in patients with scleroderma is highly prevalent and is associated with significant loss of QOL. Biofeedback has been proven to be an effective treatment for functional FI, but there are no data to support its use in scleroderma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

13 consecutive female patients (median age 59, IQR 47-65 years) with scleroderma, and 26 age- and parity-matched female patients with functional FI (disease controls, 2:1), underwent biofeedback therapy for management of FI. Fecal incontinence severity index (FISI), anorectal physiology, feeling of control and QOL were collected before and after 6 weeks of biofeedback therapy, with additional scoring repeated at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

After biofeedback treatment FISI, feeling of control and QOL significantly improved in both groups (p < 0.005). There was no difference in the degree in improvement in physiology, FISI or QOL between scleroderma patients and functional FI patients. Long-term improvement in FISI and control were seen in both groups and for QOL only in the scleroderma cohort (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with scleroderma benefit from biofeedback therapy to the same extent as that achieved in patients with functional FI. There are significant improvements in symptoms, physiology and QOL. Biofeedback is an effective, low-risk treatment option in this patient group.

Endpoints for therapeutic interventions in faecal incontinence: small step or game changer

Faecal incontinence (FI) is common and its pathophysiology and treatments continue to evolve. However, a standard measure(s) for assessing its clinical outcome has been elusive. Consequently, over 100 measures and scoring systems, each with intrinsic biases have been reported. These include adequate relief or global satisfaction, ≥50% reduction in episodes or days without FI, quality of life (QOL), FI severity scales and composite indices. Earlier scales relied on the frequency and type of solid, liquid or flatus incontinence and effects on life style whereas newer scales have incorporated urgency, use of pads, antidiarrhoeals and amount of leakage, using prospective daily stool diaries or retrospective weekly or single point assessments. Such a plethora of measures have negatively impacted the assessment and outcome of clinical trials, and have made comparisons difficult. So, how does one sort out the grain from the chaff? In a provocative, post-hoc analysis published in this issue, the minimal clinically important difference, i.e. the smallest change detected by an instrument that is associated with a clinically meaningful change was used to assess FI endpoint. Based on this a ≥50% reduction in FI episodes is recommended as a clinically meaningful outcome measure when assessed by prospective stool diary, and it correlates with symptoms and severity. However, this requires further validation in multi-centre, longer duration and therapeutically effective clinical trial(s). Simultaneous assessment of coping strategies, QOL and psychosocial domains can provide further insights regarding the overall impact of treatments. This mini-review discusses the advances and controversies in defining meaningful FI endpoints.

Food, fibre, bile acids and the pelvic floor: An integrated low risk low cost approach to managing irritable bowel syndrome

Patients presenting with abdominal pain and diarrhea are often labelled as suffering from irritable bowel syndrome, and medications may be used often without success. Advances in the understanding of the causes of the symptoms (including pelvic floor weakness and incontinence, bile salt malabsorption and food intolerance) mean that effective, safe and well tolerated treatments are now available.