Efficacy of biofeedback therapy for objective improvement of pelvic function in low anterior resection syndrome

Clinical Management of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: Review of the Current Diagnosis and Treatment

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a series of bowel dysfunction symptoms, including altered bowel frequency, irregular bowel rhythms, fecal incontinence, and constipation. LARS occurs in 80% of patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery, affecting patients' quality of life along with social avoidance. Different measurements and treatments have been raised to deal with LARS, but no systematic standard has been developed.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS

To promote the standardization of clinical trials and clinical management of LARS, this review summarizes the latest findings up until 2023 regarding the diagnostic criteria, assessment protocols, and treatment modalities for postoperative LARS in rectal cancer.

RESULTS

The diagnostic criteria for LARS need to be updated to the definition proposed by the LARS International Collaborative Group, replacing the current application of the LARS score. In both clinical trials and clinical treatment, the severity of LARS should be assessed using at least one symptom assessment questionnaire, the LARS score or MSKCC BFI, and at least one scale related to quality of life. Anorectal manometry, fecoflowmetry, endoscopic ultrasonography, and pelvic floor muscle strength testing are recommended to be adopted only in clinical trials. After analysis of the latest literature on LARS treatment, a stepwise classification model is established for the standardized clinical management of LARS. Patients with minor LARS can start with first-line treatment, including management of self-behavior with an emphasis on diet modification and medication. Lamosetron, colesevelam hydrochloride, and loperamide are common antidiarrheal agents. Second-line management indicates multi-mode pelvic floor rehabilitation and transanal irrigation. Patients with major LARS should select single or several treatments in second-line management. Refractory LARS can choose antegrade enema, neuromodulation, or colostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical trials of LARS treatment between 2020 and 2022, the eligibility criteria and evaluation system have been variable. Therefore, it is urgent to create a standard for the diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of LARS. Failure to set placebos and differentiate subgroups are limitations of many current LARS studies. Randomized controlled trials comparing diverse therapies and long-term outcomes are absent, as well. Moreover, a new scale needs to be developed to incorporate the patient's perspective and facilitate outpatient follow-up. Though the establishment of a stepwise classification model for LARS treatment here is indispensable, the refinement of the guidelines may be improved by more standardized studies.

Management of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) Following Resection for Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

A total of 60-80% of patients undergoing rectal resection (mostly as a treatment for rectal cancer) suffer from a variety of partly severe functional problems despite preservation of the anal sphincter. These patients are summarized under the term low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Preoperative radiotherapy, vascular dissection and surgical excision of the low rectum and mesorectum lead, alone or all together, to a significant impairment of colonic and (neo-) rectal motility. This results in a variety of symptoms (multiple defecation episodes, recurrent episodes of urge, clustering, incontinence, etc.) which are associated with severe impairment of quality of life (QOL).

METHODS

This narrative review summarizes the present state of knowledge regarding the pathophysiology of LARS as well as the evidence for the available treatment options to control the symptoms resulting from this condition.

RESULTS

A review of the literature (Medline, Pubmed) reveals a variety of treatment options available to control symptoms of LARS. Medical therapy, with or without dietary modification, shows only a modest effect. Pelvic floor rehabilitation consisting of muscle exercise techniques as well as biofeedback training has been associated with improvement in LARS scores and incontinence, albeit with limited scientific evidence. Transanal irrigation (TAI) has gained interest as a treatment modality for patients with LARS due to an increasing number of promising data from recently published studies. Despite this promising observation, open questions about still-unclear issues of TAI remain under debate. Neuromodulation has been applied in LARS only in a few studies with small numbers of patients and partly conflicting results.

CONCLUSION

LARS is a frequent problem after sphincter-preserving rectal surgery and leads to a marked impairment of QOL. Due to the large number of patients suffering from this condition, mandatory identification, as well as treatment of affected patients, must be considered during surgical as well as oncological follow-up. The use of a standardized treatment algorithm will lead to sufficient control of symptoms and a high probability of a marked improvement in QOL.

Experiences of bowel symptoms in patients with rectal cancer after sphincter-preserving surgery: a qualitative meta-synthesis

PURPOSE

This study is to identify and synthesize the available evidence of bowel symptom experiences of patients with rectal cancer after sphincter-preserving surgery (SPS).

METHODS

This qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) qualitative systematic review methodology and reported following the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) guidelines. Seven databases were searched on 22 December 2021. The selected studies were reviewed by two independent reviewers, and disagreements were resolved by discussion or with a third reviewer.

RESULTS

Seven qualitative articles were included in the meta-synthesis with 192 total rectal cancer patients. The review summarized 53 qualitative findings into three synthesized findings: (a) Patients experienced bowel symptoms and triggered additional physiological problems, and they underestimated bowel symptoms; (b) patients had many negative emotions, and their daily life and social interaction were disturbed; and (c) patients adopted strategies to adapt or control their bowel symptoms. According to the ConQual evidence grading approach, the confidence of the synthesized findings was rated as moderate to low.

CONCLUSIONS

The bowel symptoms of patients with rectal cancer after SPS have troubled their lives. Timely acquisition of symptom-related knowledge and enhancement of their coping abilities are important for the control and management of bowel symptoms. Healthcare professionals should clearly understand the bowel symptoms that patients may experience after SPS and provide supportive care for patients to improve patients' self-management abilities and quality of life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42021242610.

Analgesic effect of structured anal skin care for perianal dermatitis after low anterior resection in the rectal cancer patients: prospective, single-center, open-label, therapeutic confirmatory, randomized clinical trial

Purpose

This prospective, single-center, open-label, therapeutic confirmatory, randomized clinical trial aimed to assess the alleviation of anal pain by applying structured anal skin care including skin protectants in rectal cancer patients with low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) combined with anal pain.

Methods

From December 2017 to May 2020, 42 patients with LARS (scores of ≥21) and anal pain (visual analogue scale [VAS] score of ≥3) were randomly assigned and observed for 4 weeks. The conventional treatment consisted of dietary management, sitz baths, prohibition of anal scrubbing, loperamide, and dioctahedral smectite. In the anal care group, cleanser, barrier cream, and barrier spray were applied to the anal skin after defecation following the conventional treatment. The primary outcome was analgesic effect on anal pain after 2 weeks of structured treatment (anal care group) or conventional (control group). The cutoff for analgesic effect was a decrease in the anal pain score (VAS score of ≥2 or ≥30% reduction).

Results

As a primary outcome, the analgesic effect was significantly higher in the anal care group (P = 0.034). The incontinence-associated dermatitis skin condition score was significantly improved in the anal care group than control group after 4 weeks (P = 0.023). There were no significant differences in LARS scores and quality of life scores between 2 groups.

Conclusion

Structured anal skin care has a significant analgesic effect in reducing anal pain and improving anal skin conditions in patients with LARS after rectal cancer surgery.

The Longitudinal Course of Low-anterior Resection Syndrome: An individual Patient Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to better understand the longitudinal course of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) to guide patient expectations and identify those at risk of persisting dysfunction.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

LARS describes disordered bowel function after rectal resection that significantly impacts quality of life.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched for studies that enrolled adults undergoing anterior resection for rectal cancer and used the LARS score to assess bowel function at ≥2 postoperative time points. Regression analyses were performed on deidentified patient-level data to identify predictors of change in LARS score from baseline (3-6months) to 12-months and 18-24 months.

RESULTS

Eight studies with a total of 701 eligible patients were included. The mean LARS score improved over time, from 29.4 (95% confidence interval 28.6-30.1) at baseline to 16.6 at 36 months (95% confidence interval 14.2%-18.9%). On multivariable analysis, a greater improvement in mean LARS score between baseline and 12 months was associated with no ileostomy formation [mean difference (MD) -1.7 vs 1.7, P < 0.001], and presence of LARS (major vs minor vs no LARS) at baseline (MD -3.8 vs -1.7 vs 5.4, P < 0.001). Greater improvement in mean LARS score between baseline and 18-24 months was associated with partial mesorectal excision vs total mesorectal excision (MD-8.6 vs 1.5, P < 0.001) and presence of LARS (major vs minor vs no LARS) at baseline (MD -8.8 vs -5.3 vs 3.4, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LARS improves by 18 months postoperatively then remains stable for up to 3 years. Total mesorectal excision, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, and ileostomy formation negatively impact upon bowel function recovery.

Functional anorectal studies in patients with low anterior resection syndrome

BACKGROUND

Most patients who have undergone low anterior resection suffer from bowel dysfunction postoperatively. This condition is referred to as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). The aim was to study defecatory patterns in LARS patients compared to a primary control group of fecal incontinence (FI) patients and normal subjects (NS) with the Fecobionics device.

METHODS

Fecobionics expulsion parameters were assessed in an interventional study design. The Fecobionics probe contained pressure sensors at the front, rear, and inside the bag. The bag was distended until urge sensation in rectum in 11 LARS patients (5F/6M, 63.2 ± 2.9 years), 11 FI subjects (7F/4M, 64.4 ± 2.5 years), and 11 NS (7F/4M, 63.6 ± 3.0 years). Defecation indices were computed from the Fecobionics data. All subjects had high-resolution anorectal manometry (ARM) and balloon expulsion test (BET) done. Symptoms were evaluated with LARS and Wexner scores.

KEY RESULTS

The LARS score in the LARS patients was 39.0 ± 0.6. The Wexner score in the LARS, FI, and NS groups was 14.2 ± 0.7, 10.1±1.0, and 0.0 ± 0.0 (p < 0.01). The resting anal pressure and squeeze pressure were lowest in LARS patients (p < 0.05). The urge volume was 11.8 ± 4.2, 59.6 ± 6.4, and 41.6 ± 6.4 ml in the LARS, FI, and NS groups, respectively (p < 0.001). The expulsion duration did not differ between groups. Defecation indices were lowest in the LARS patients (p < 0.05). ARM-BET confirmed the low urge volume in LARS patients whereas anal pressures did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

The LARS patients had low anal pressures and urge volume. Most Defecation Indices differed between the LARS group and the other groups.

Feasibility Study of Transanal Irrigation Using a Colostomy Irrigation System in Patients With Low Anterior Resection Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Low anterior resection syndrome has a negative impact on quality of life. Intestinal irrigation is a method of lavage consisting of a scheduled evacuation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate functional and quality-of-life outcomes in patients with low anterior resection syndrome after transanal irrigation using a colostomy irrigation system.

DESIGN

This was a prospective case series.

SETTINGS

This study presents a single-center experience at a tertiary oncological center in an upper-middle-income country.

PATIENTS

Patients classified as having minor or major low anterior resection syndrome 12 months after their operation were selected.

INTERVENTIONS

Transanal irrigation was performed using an ostomy irrigation kit. Questionnaires assessing patients' bowel function (low anterior resection syndrome and Wexner score) and quality of life (Short Form-36 questionnaire) were applied before and after treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were low anterior resection syndrome score and quality-of-life improvement after a 12-month treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 22 patients included, 20 had major and 2 had minor low anterior resection syndrome, with a median score of 39, especially high rates of incontinence for liquid stool (21; 95.5%), clustering (21; 95.5%), and urgency (17; 77.3%). All patients successfully completed the 3-day training, and there were no complications during the treatment. After the 12-month period, the median score was 8, with 90% of the patients classified as having "no syndrome" and great improvement in all domains of this score. The most improved quality-of-life sections were patient vitality (p = 0.025) and physical (p = 0.002), social (p = 0.001), and emotional aspects (p = 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its small sample size and the limited follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a safe implementation protocol of an ostomy irrigation device for transanal irrigation. It also adds to the literature that transanal irrigation is a safe, effective, and easily implemented procedure for patients with low anterior resection syndrome with a significant improvement in quality of life. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B563.ESTUDIO DE FACTIBILIDAD DE LA IRRIGACIÓN TRANSANAL UTILIZANDO EL SISTEMA DE IRRIGACIÓN PARA COLOSTOMÍA EN PACIENTES CON SÍNDROME DE RESECCIÓN ANTERIOR BAJAANTECEDENTES:El síndrome de resección anterior baja tiene un impacto negativo en la calidad de vida de los pacientes. La irrigación intestinal es un método de lavado que consiste en evacuaciones programadas.OBJETIVOS:Evaluar los resultados de la funcionalidad e impacto en la calidad de vida de los pacientes con síndrome de resección anterior y baja posterior a la irrigación transanal utilizando un sistema de irrigación de colostomía.DISEÑO:Es estudio prospectivo de una serie de casos.ESCENARIO:En este estudio se muestra la experiencia de un centro oncológico de tercer nivel en un país en vías de desarrollo.PACIENTES:Aquellos clasificados como síndrome con afección en menor o mayor grado doce meses después de la cirugía.METODO:Se efectuó irrigación transanal utilizando un equipo de irrigación de estomas. Se aplicaron cuestionarios para valorar la función intestinal de los pacientes (síndrome de resección anterior baja y la escala de Wexner) y para calidad de vida (Cuestionario Corto-36) antes y después del tratamiento.EVALUACION DE LOS RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES:Los principales resultados se obtuvieron de la escala del síndrome de resección baja y la mejoría en la calidad vida doce meses después de tratamiento.RESULTADOS:De los veintidós pacientes incluidos, veinte presentaron manifestaciones mayores del síndrome de resección baja y dos, manifestaciones menores. Con una media de treinta y nueve, se encontraron, especialmente, altos índices de incontinencia a líquidos (21; 95'5%) hiperdefecación "clustering" (21; 95'5%) y urgencia (17; 77'3%). Todos los pacientes completaron en forma satisfactoria el entrenamiento de tres días sin presentarse complicaciones durante el tratamiento. Al término del mes doce la media fue de ocho, con el 90% de los pacientes clasificados como "sin síndrome" y se observó una mejoría substancial en todos los puntos de la evaluación. Las secciones de calidad de vida que mostraron una mejoría significativa fueron: la vitalidad del paciente (p = 0'025), física (p = 0'002), social (p = 0'001) y emocional (p = 0'001).LIMITACIONES:El tamaño de la muestra es pequeño y el tiempo de seguimiento corto.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio muestra la implementación de un protocolo seguro para la irrigación de estomas mediante un dispositivo transanal. Además contribuye con el concepto en la literatura de que la seguridad de la irrigación transanal es seguro, efectivo y facilmente reproducible para pacientes con síndrome de resección anterior baja con una mejoría significativa en la calidad de vida. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B563. (Traducción-Dr. Miguel Esquivel-Herrera).

Effectiveness of Biofeedback Therapy in Patients with Bowel Dysfunction Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Systemic Review with Meta-Analysis

Objective

To identify, systematically review and synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of biofeedback therapy in patients with bowel dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery.

Data Sources

Four electronic databases (PubMed 1974–2021; Embase1980–2021; Cochrane databases and the trial registers) were systematically searched by reviewers from inception through March 2021.

Study Selection

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case series studies were included for adults with bowel dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery. All participants received an intervention of biofeedback treatment. Any outcomes that can evaluate the patient’s bowel function were the primary research endpoint, while the quality of life was the second endpoint. The disagreements between the two reviewers were resolved after discussion and the third independent reviewer’s ruling. As a result, 12 of 185 studies met selection criteria and were included in the review.

Data Extraction

We designed an electronic data extraction form and data were extracted independently. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias, the MINORS scale, and the Institute of Health Economics scale.

Data Synthesis

Meta-analyses were conducted for case series only and narrative syntheses were completed. Key findings included significant improvements in bowel function as well as health-related quality of life after biofeedback therapy. (Wexner score: t=7, MD=3.33; 95% CI [2.48, 4.18]) and (Vaizey score: t=3, MD=2.46; 95% CI [1.98, 2.93]). Subgroup analysis of Wexner score: receiving electrical stimulation therapy (t=3, MD=2.36; 95% CI [1.51, 3.22]), not receiving electrical stimulation (t=4, MD=3.79;95% CI[2.66, 4.93]); not receiving adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (t=3, MD=2.42;95% CI[1.61, 3.24]), chemotherapy and radiotherapy (t=1, MD=4.10; 95% CI [2.90, 5.30]), radiotherapy and chemotherapy on parts of patients (t=2, MD=3.46;95% CI [1.41, 5.51]), chemotherapy (t=1, MD=4.81; 95% CI [3.38, 6.24]); performing ISR (t=2, MD=3.32;95% CI [0.37, 6.27]), performing AR (t=4, MD=3.08; 95% CI [2.12, 4.04]), performing PLRAS surgery (t=1, MD=4.10;95% CI[2.90, 5.30]).

Conclusion

Although biofeedback therapy may improve intestinal function and quality of life as well as anal function reflected by ARM after surgery, patient satisfaction is still unclear. Due to the scarcity of data, good-quality research is required to delve deeper.

Clinical Trial Registration Number

CRD42020192658.

Functional outcomes after sphincter-preserving surgeries for low-lying rectal cancer: A review

Sphincter preservation and organ restoration during rectal cancer surgery avoids permanent stoma creation and diminishes psychosocial damages. However, decreased rectal volumes and sphincter dysfunction—including pelvic nerve damage—results in low anterior resection syndrome, as well as urinary and sexual dysfunction after rectal resection. Bowel habit changes such as fecal incontinence, fecal urgency, frequent bowel movements, clustered stools, and difficulties in bowel emptying can be treated using medications, pelvic floor rehabilitation, sacral neuromodulation, or neorectal reservoir reconstruction. Pelvic nerve damage resulting from superior and inferior hypogastric plexi during sphincter-preserving rectal cancer surgery can induce urologic and sexual dysfunctions. Preoperative voiding difficulty, perioperative blood loss, and autonomic nerve injury are considered independent risk factors for postoperative urinary dysfunction. Retrograde ejaculation and erectile dysfunction, female dyspareunia, and vaginal dryness are manifestations of sexual dysfunction resulting from autonomic nerve injury during rectal cancer surgery. Multifactorial causes for functional outcomes after sphincter- preserving surgeries are considered to improve patient’s quality of life with acceptable oncologic outcomes in the treatment of rectal cancer patients.

Effect of Biofeedback Therapy during Temporary Stoma Period in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Prospective Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

This prospective randomized controlled study was designed to evaluate the effect of biofeedback therapy (BFT) during temporary stoma period to prevent defecation dysfunction after sphincter-preserving surgery (SPS).

METHODS

Following SPS with temporary stoma, patients were divided according to whether (BFT group) or not (Control group) they received BFT. BFT was performed once or twice a week during the temporary stoma period. Kegel exercise were advised to all the patients. Subjective defecation symptoms were evaluated according to Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score (CCIS) as primary outcome at 12 months postoperatively. Manometric data of five time-points were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients in the BFT group and 23 patients in the control group received anorectal physiologic testing. The incidence of CCIS of more than 9 points, which is the primary end point in this study, was not statistically different between BFT group and control group (p = 1.000). The liquid stool incontinence in the BFT group showed a better tendency (p = 0.06) at 12 months post-SPS. Time-dependent serial changes in maximal sensory threshold (Max RST) was significantly different between the BFT and control groups (p = 0.048). Also, the change of mean resting pressure (MRP) tended to be more stable in the BFT group (p = 0.074).

CONCLUSIONS

The BFT in the period of temporary stoma may be related to liquid stool incontinence at 12 months post-SPS and lead to stable MRP and better Max RST. Therefore, BFT during temporary stoma might be helpful for preventing and minimizing defecation dysfunction in high risk patients after SPS, NCT01661829).

MAIN MANOMETRIC FINDINGS AND POTENTIAL FOR ANORECTAL PHYSICAL THERAPY IN THE TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH EVACUATION DISORDERS

BACKGROUND

Evacuation disorders are prevalent in the adult population, and a significant portion of cases may originate from pelvic floor muscle dysfunctions. Anorectal manometry (ARM) is an important diagnostic tool and can guide conservative treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prevalence of pelvic dysfunction in patients with evacuation disorders through clinical and manometric findings and to evaluate, using the same findings, whether there are published protocols that could be guided by anorectal manometry.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective database of 278 anorectal manometries performed for the investigation of evacuation disorders in patients seen at the anorectal physiology outpatient clinic of Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto between January 2015 to June 2019 was conducted. The following parameters were calculated: resting pressure (RP), squeeze pressure (SP), high-pressure zone (HPZ), rectal sensitivity (RS) and rectal capacity (RC). The pressure measurements and manometric plots were reviewed to determine the diagnosis and to propose potential pelvic physical therapy procedures. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Fisher's exact test were used to compare the continuous variables and to evaluate the equality of variances between groups of patients with fecal incontinence (FI) and chronic constipation (CC). Results with a significance level lower than 0.05 (P-value <0.05) were considered statistically significant. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM® SPSS® Statistics version 20.

RESULTS

The mean age of the sample was 45±22 years, with a predominance of females (64.4%) and economically inactive (72.7%) patients. The indications for exam performance were FI (65.8%) and CC (34.2%). Patients with FI had lower RP (41.9 mmHg x 67.6 mmHg; P<0.001), SP (85.4 mmHg x 116.0 mmHg; P<0.001), HPZ (1.49 cm x 2.42 cm; P<0.001), RS (57.9 mL x 71.5 mL; P=0.044) and RC (146.2 mL x 195.5 mL; P<0.001) compared to those of patients with CC. For patients with FI, the main diagnosis was the absence of a functional anal canal (49.7%). For patients with CC, the main diagnosis was outflow tract obstruction (54.7%). For patients with FI, the main protocol involved a combination of anorectal biofeedback (aBF) with tibial nerve stimulation (TNS) (57.9%). For patients with CC, the most indicated protocol was aBF combined with TNS and rectal balloon training (RBT) (54.7%).

CONCLUSION

There was a high prevalence of pelvic floor changes in patients with evacuation disorders. There was a high potential for performing pelvic floor physical therapy based on the clinical and manometric findings.