Cost-effectiveness analysis of sacral nerve stimulation as treatment for severe irritable bowel syndrome

Update on treatment of abdominal pain in irritable bowel syndrome: A narrative review

The objectives of this narrative review are to update readers on the current state-of-the-art regarding diverse approaches for the treatment of pain, global symptoms, or adequate relief in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The article appraises medications, dietary interventions including low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, and monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAP) diet, fecal microbial transplantation (FMT), electrical approaches, and behavioral therapies including cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), gut-directed hypnotherapy (GDH), mindfulness, and open-label placebo. Current evidence demonstrates only modest benefit in global IBS symptoms and pain relief. A future approach that identifies pathophysiological mechanisms of IBS through validated biomarkers has the potential to individualize treatment of patients rather than sequential therapeutic trial and error approaches.

Electrical devices for functional visceral pain

Several studies have documented correction of dysmotility in several regions of the gastrointestinal tract based on electrical stimulation of extrinsic nerves supplying those regions. In this issue of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, Ma et al. (2023) document the effect of transcutaneous neuromodulation applied by acustimulation at ST36 for ineffective esophageal motility in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. In addition to motor effects, there were also significant effects on GERD symptoms, raising the question whether extrinsic electrical nerve stimulation of the gut can reduce symptoms through effects that target sensation. This brief review summarizes evidence regarding the application of electrical acustimulation, transauricular electrical stimulation, and sacral electrical or magnetic stimulation to reduce abdominal or pelvic pain.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Visceral Pain: Present Approaches and Future Strategies

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of successful neuromodulation strategies for managing chronic visceral pain lag behind what is now treatment of choice in refractory chronic back and extremity pain for many providers in the United States and Europe. Changes in public policy and monetary support to identify nonopioid treatments for chronic pain have sparked interest in alternative options. In this review, we discuss the scope of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for visceral pain, its limitations, and the potential role for new intradural devices of the type that we are developing in our laboratories, which may be able to overcome existing challenges.

METHODS

A review of the available literature relevant to this topic was performed, with particular focus on the pertinent neuroanatomy and uses of spinal cord stimulation systems in the treatment of malignant and nonmalignant gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and chronic pelvic pain.

RESULTS

To date, there have been multiple off-label reports testing SCS for refractory gastrointestinal and genitourinary conditions. Though some findings have been favorable for these organs and systems, there is insufficient evidence to make this practice routine. The unique configuration and layout of the pelvic pain pathways may not be ideally treated using traditional SCS implantation techniques, and intradural stimulation may be a viable alternative.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the prevalence of visceral pain, the application of neuromodulation therapies, a standard approach for other painful conditions, has received far too little attention, despite promising outcomes from uncontrolled trials. Detailed descriptions of visceral pain pathways may offer several clues that could be used to implement devices tailored to this unique anatomy.

Sacral nerve modulation for irritable bowel syndrome: A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled crossover study

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is among the most common gastrointestinal disorders, and a substantial proportion of patients have an insufficient response to treatment. In a single-blinded study, sacral nerve modulation (SNM) significantly reduced symptoms of IBS. The aim of the present double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study was to evaluate the effect of SNM for IBS.

METHODS

We included patients with diarrhea-predominant or mixed IBS and a minimum baseline IBS-specific symptom score of 40 points (Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale-IBS version). Patients underwent a 6-week period of SNM. In the first 4 weeks, the patients were randomized 1:1 to have the neurostimulator set subsensory or OFF for 2 weeks and then the opposite for another 2 weeks. Patients and investigators were blinded to settings. In the remaining 2 weeks, the stimulation was set suprasensory. IBS-specific symptoms and quality of life were assessed with validated questionnaires and bowel diaries.

KEY RESULTS

Twenty-one patients were randomized and eligible for analysis. The IBS-specific symptom score was reduced with borderline significance during stimulation (subsensory-OFF median change -1 (-26, 9), OFF-subsensory median change 8 (-11, 36); P = 0.0572). Pain was significantly reduced during stimulation (subsensory-OFF median change -1.5 (-4, 1), OFF-subsensory median change 1 (-4, 3); P = 0.0188), along with the number of daily bowel movements (subsensory-OFF median change 0 (-1.8, 0.2), OFF-subsensory median change 0.2 (-0.5, 1.1); P = 0.0373). The median placebo effect was 14% (0, 55).

CONCLUSION AND INFERENCES

Sacral nerve modulation for IBS seems promising but should be considered experimental until larger multicenter studies have been performed.

Cost-effectiveness of interventions for medically unexplained symptoms: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

In primary and secondary care medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) or functional somatic syndromes (FSS) constitute a major burden for patients and society with high healthcare costs and societal costs. Objectives were to provide an overview of the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of interventions for MUS or FSS, and to assess the quality of these studies.

METHODS

We searched the databases PubMed, PsycINFO, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) and the CEA registry to conduct a systematic review. Articles with full economic evaluations on interventions focusing on adult patients with undifferentiated MUS or fibromyalgia (FM), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), with no restrictions on comparators, published until 15 June 2018, were included. We excluded preventive interventions. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and cost-effectiveness data and used the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Checklist to appraise the methodological quality.

RESULTS

A total of 39 studies out of 1,613 articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies reported costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost-utility analyses (CUAs). In 13 CUAs the intervention conditions dominated the control conditions or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the willingness-to-pay threshold of € 50,000 per QALY, meaning that the interventions were (on average) cost-effective in comparison with the control condition. Group interventions focusing on MUS (n = 3) or FM (n = 4) might be more cost-effective than individual interventions. The included studies were heterogeneous with regard to the included patients, interventions, study design, and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This review provides an overview of 39 included studies of interventions for patients with MUS and FSS and the methodological quality of these studies. Considering the limited comparability due to the heterogeneity of the studies, group interventions might be more cost-effective than individual interventions.

REGISTRATION

Study methods were documented in an international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) protocol, registration number: CRD42017060424.

Three-year follow-up of sacral nerve stimulation for patients with diarrhoea-predominant and mixed irritable bowel syndrome

AIM

Our unit has recently shown that sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) has a significantly positive short-term effect on selected patients with diarrhoea-predominant or mixed irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate the medium-term efficacy of SNS for IBS to establish whether SNS could have a future role in the treatment of IBS.

METHOD

Patients with IBS who had previously been implanted with a permanent neurostimulator as part of a randomized, controlled, crossover study, were assessed for medium-term follow-up. The primary end-point was change in the IBS-specific symptom score (Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale-Irritable Bowel Syndrome version questionnaire) from baseline to 3-year follow-up. The secondary end-point was a change in the IBS-specific quality of life score (Irritable Bowel Syndrome-Impact Scale questionnaire) from baseline to 3-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 26 patients, 20 were eligible for 3-year follow-up. The median IBS-specific symptom score was significantly lower at 3-year follow-up (30, range 13-71) than at baseline (62, 45-80) (P = 0.0001). The effect was observed in all symptom clusters within the score. Also, the median IBS-specific quality of life score was significantly improved at 3-year follow-up (52, 26-169) compared with baseline (135, 82-180, P = 0.0002). The effect was observed in all domains of the score. As per the protocol, 75% of patients were judged therapeutic successes. Seventy per cent of patients had a more than 50% reduction in daily IBS symptoms.

CONCLUSION

At medium-term follow-up, SNS continues to be an effective treatment for highly selected patients with diarrhoea-predominant or mixed IBS.