Metrics Used to Quantify Fecal Incontinence and Constipation

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Suture Rectopexy Versus Laparoscopic Mesh Rectopexy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The contemporary literature provides conflicting evidence regarding the precedence of laparoscopic mesh rectopexy over laparoscopic suture rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of mesh and suture rectopexy to improve the surgical management of complete rectal prolapse. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to extract studies based on mesh versus suture rectopexy and published from 2001 to 2023. The articles of interest were obtained from PubMed Central, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Journal Storage (JSTOR), Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes included rectal prolapse recurrence, constipation improvement, and operative time. The secondary endpoints included the Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score, Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score, intraoperative bleeding, hospital stay duration, mortality, overall postoperative complications, and surgical site infection. A statistically significant low recurrence of rectal prolapse (odds ratio: 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21-0.80; p=0.009) and longer mean operative duration (mean difference: 27.05, 95% CI 18.86-35.24; p<0.00001) were observed in patients with mesh rectopexy versus suture rectopexy. Both study groups, however, had no significant differences in constipation improvement and all secondary endpoints (all p>0.05). The laparoscopic mesh rectopexy was associated with a low postoperative rectal prolapse recurrence and a longer operative duration compared to laparoscopic suture rectopexy. Prospective randomized controlled trials should further evaluate mesh and suture rectopexy approaches for postoperative outcomes to inform the surgical management of complete rectal prolapse.

Regenerative Medicine in Urogynecology: Where We Are and Where We Want to Be

ABSTRACT

Pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) constitute a major public health issue given their negative effect on quality of life for millions of women worldwide and the associated economic burden. As the prevalence of PFDs continues to increase, novel therapeutic approaches for the effective treatment of these disorders are urgently needed. Regenerative medicine techniques, including cellular therapies, extracellular vesicles, secretomes, platelet-rich plasma, laser therapy, and bioinductive acellular biomaterial scaffolds, are emerging as viable clinical options to counteract urinary and fecal incontinence, as well as pelvic organ prolapse. This brief expert review explores the current state-of-science regarding application of these therapies for the treatment of PFDs. Although regenerative approaches have not been widely deployed in clinical care to date, these innovative techniques show a promising safety profile and potential to positively affect the quality of life of patients with PFDs. Furthermore, investigations focused on regeneration of the main constituents of the pelvic floor and lower urinary tract improve our understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of PFDs. Regenerative medicine techniques have a high potential not only to revolutionize treatment of PFDs but also to prevent these complex conditions.

Diagnostic tools for fecal incontinence: Scoring systems are the crucial first step

The main aim of this editorial is to comment on the recent article published by Garg et al in the World Journal of Gastroenterology 2023; 29: 4593-4603. This original research presents a new scoring system for fecal incontinence. Fecal incontinence is a chronic disease with a severe impact on the quality of life of the patients. Substantial social stigmatization often leads to significant underreporting of the condition even during visits to a specialist and could lead to further mismanagement or non-existent management of the disease. An important fact is that patients are often unable to describe their condition when not asked precisely defined questions. This problem is partially resolved by scoring questionnaires. Several scoring systems are commonly used; however, each of them has their shortcomings. For example, the absence of different kinds of leakage besides flatus and stool could further lead to underscoring the incontinence severity. Therefore, there has long been a call for a more precise scoring system. The correct identification of the presence and severity of fecal incontinence is paramount for further diagnostic approach and for choosing the appropriate therapy option. This editorial describes fecal incontinence, its effect on quality of life in general and further evaluates the diagnostic approach with a particular focus on symptom scoring systems and their implications for clinical practice.

GI Symptoms in Pancreatic Cancer

This review will apply a multidisciplinary approach to GI symptoms with attention to symptom assessment (instruments and qualitative aspects), differential diagnosis, and recent findings relevant to management of symptoms and underlying diseases. We conclude that further development of supportive interventions for GI symptoms for both patient and caregivers has the potential to reduce distress from GI symptoms, and anticipate better symptom control with advances in scientific knowledge and improvement of the evidence base.

Faecal incontinence in adults

Faecal incontinence, which is defined by the unintentional loss of solid or liquid stool, has a worldwide prevalence of ≤7% in community-dwelling adults and can markedly impair quality of life. Nonetheless, many patients might not volunteer the symptom owing to embarrassment. Bowel disturbances, particularly diarrhoea, anal sphincter trauma (obstetrical injury or previous surgery), rectal urgency and burden of chronic illness are the main risk factors for faecal incontinence; others include neurological disorders, inflammatory bowel disease and pelvic floor anatomical disturbances. Faecal incontinence is classified by its type (urge, passive or combined), aetiology (anorectal disturbance, bowel symptoms or both) and severity, which is derived from the frequency, volume, consistency and nature (urge or passive) of stool leakage. Guided by the clinical features, diagnostic tests and therapies are implemented stepwise. When simple measures (for example, bowel modifiers such as fibre supplements, laxatives and anti-diarrhoeal agents) fail, anorectal manometry and other tests (endoanal imaging, defecography, rectal compliance and sensation, and anal neurophysiological tests) are performed as necessary. Non-surgical options (diet and lifestyle modification, behavioural measures, including biofeedback therapy, pharmacotherapy for constipation or diarrhoea, and anal or vaginal barrier devices) are often effective, especially in patients with mild faecal incontinence. Thereafter, perianal bulking agents, sacral neuromodulation and other surgeries may be considered when necessary.