Drug treatment for faecal incontinence in adults

Sacral nerve modulation for patients with fecal incontinence: long-term outcome and effects on sexual function

Sacral nerve modulation has become an established treatment for fecal and urinary incontinence, and sexual disorders. The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcome of sacral neuromodulation in patients with fecal or combined fecal and urinary incontinence (double incontinence), assessing its safety, efficacy, and impact on quality of life and sexual function. This was a multicentric, retrospective, cohort study including patients with fecal or double incontinence who received sacral neuromodulation at seven European centers between 2007 and 2017 and completed a 5-year follow-up. The main outcome measures included improvements of incontinence symptoms and quality of life compared with baseline, evaluated using validated tools and questionnaires at 1-, 6-, 12-, 36- and 60-month follow-up. 108 (102 women, mean age 62.4 ± 13.4 years) patients were recruited, of whom 88 (81.4%) underwent definitive implantation of the pacemaker. Patients' baseline median Cleveland Clinic Incontinence Score was 15 (10-18); it decreased to 2 (1-4) and 1 (1-2) at the 12- and 36-month follow-up (p < 0.0001), remaining stable at the 5-year follow-up. Fecal incontinence quality of life score improved significantly. All patients with sexual dysfunction (n = 48) at baseline reported symptom resolution at the 5-year follow-up. The study was limited by the retrospective design and the relatively small patient sample. Sacral nerve modulation is an effective treatment for fecal and double incontinence, achieving satisfactory long-term success rates, with resolution of concomitant sexual dysfunction.

Faecal incontinence: a narrative review of clinic-based management for the general gynaecologist

The objective of this article is to provide an informative and narrative review for the general Gynaecologist regarding the pathophysiology and conservative treatments available for faecal incontinence (FI). A PubMed search was performed by library staff and an author using the keywords: anal incontinence, faecal incontinence, accidental bowel leakage, outpatient clinic management of faecal incontinence and defecatory dysfunction. As the social limitations of FI can be devastating and long-term patient satisfaction rates after anal sphincteroplasty remain reportedly-low, the role of clinic-based management of FI has continued to grow. The purpose of this article is to provide the Obstetrician and Gynaecologist with a basic template for screening, evaluation and management of faecal incontinence in the clinical setting.

Impact of fecal incontinence and its treatment on quality of life in women

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a physically and psychosocially debilitating disorder which negatively impacts quality of life (QOL). It bears a significant burden not only on patients but also on their families, caretakers as well as society as a whole. Even though it is considered a somewhat common condition, especially as women age, the prevalence is often underestimated due to patients' reluctance to report symptoms or seek care. The evaluation and treatment of FI can be also hindered by lack of understanding of the current management options among healthcare providers and how they impact on QOL. This article provides a comprehensive review on the impact of FI and its treatment on QOL in women.

The pharmacologic treatment of short bowel syndrome: new tricks and novel agents

Short bowel syndrome (SBS) is a manifestation of massive resection of the intestines resulting in severe fluid, electrolyte, and vitamin/mineral deficiencies. Diet and parenteral nutrition play a large role in the management of SBS; however, pharmacologic options are becoming more readily available. These pharmacologic agents focus on reducing secretions and stimulating intestinal adaptation. The choice of medication is highly dependent on the patient's symptoms, remaining anatomy, and risk versus benefit profile for each agent. This article focuses on common and novel pharmacologic medications used in SBS, including expert advice on their indications and use.

Dutch evidence statement for pelvic physical therapy in patients with anal incontinence

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

To promote agreement among and support the quality of pelvic physiotherapists' skills and clinical reasoning in The Netherlands, an Evidence Statement Anal Incontinence (AI) was developed based on the practice-driven problem definitions outlined. We present a summary of the current state of knowledge and formulate recommendations for a methodical assessment and treatment for patients with AI, and place the evidence in a broader perspective of current developments.

METHODS

Electronic literature searches were conducted in relevant databases with regard to prevalence, incidence, costs, etiological and prognostic factors, predictors of response to therapy, prevention, assessment, and treatment. The recommendations have been formulated on the basis of scientific evidence and where no evidence was available, recommendations were consensus-based.

RESULTS

The evidence statement incorporates a practice statement with corresponding notes that clarify the recommendations, and accompanying flowcharts, describing the steps and recommendations with regard to the diagnostic and therapeutic process. The diagnostic process consists of history-taking and physical examination supported by measurement instruments. For each problem category for patients with AI, a certain treatment plan can be distinguished dependent on the presence of pelvic floor dysfunction, awareness of loss of stools, comorbidity, neurological problems, adequate anorectal sensation, and (in)voluntary control. Available evidence and expert opinion support the use of education, pelvic floor muscle training, biofeedback, and electrostimulation in selected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence statement reflects the current state of knowledge for a methodical and systematic physical therapeutic assessment and treatment for patients with AI.

Medical management of fecal incontinence in challenging populations: a review

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a common and growing problem in the United States. Although there are multiple emerging novel interventions for the treatment of FI, the mainstay of initial therapy remains medical management. In this article, we review the available literature on the medical management of FI, with a special focus on patients with multiple sclerosis, diabetes mellitus, and the elderly.

Symptom improvement in women after fecal incontinence treatments: a multicenter cohort study of the pelvic floor disorders network

OBJECTIVES

The study aims were to characterize women with fecal incontinence (FI) and measure changes in FI severity and quality of life 3 and 12 months after treatment.

METHODS

This study is a secondary analysis of a multicenter study measuring adaptive behaviors among women with FI. Women included had a primary complaint of at least monthly FI over 3 consecutive months and planned FI treatment. Demographic and medical history data were obtained at baseline. Data were collected at baseline, 3 months, and 12 months after clinically selected, nonstandardized treatment. Validated questionnaires were as follows: Fecal Incontinence Severity Index, Modified Manchester Health Questionnaire, Pelvic Floor Disorders Inventory's Colorectal and Anal Distress Inventory, Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire's Colorectal and Anal Impact Questionnaire, and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form. Questionnaire score changes from baseline were compared using paired t tests at 3 and 12 months after treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 133 women enrolled, 90 women had treatment data at 3 months and 77 at 12 months. Nonsurgical therapies were the most common (78%) with anal sphincter repair in 22%. Fecal Incontinence Severity Index scores and Modified Manchester Health Questionnaire scores significantly improved 3 months after nonsurgical and surgical treatments (-8.8 ± 12.0 and -12.6 ± 19.2, respectively, P < 0.001), as did Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory and Colorectal-Anal Impact Questionnaire scores (-52.7 ± 70.0 and -60.6 ± 70.0, respectively, P < 0.001) and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form mental health scores (4.2 ± 9.4, P = 0.001). Improvement persisted 12 months posttreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In women seeking care for FI, symptom severity and condition-specific quality of life significantly improve within the first 3 months after FI treatment and are maintained up to 12 months.

Drug treatment for faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence (leakage of bowel motions or stool) is a common symptom which causes significant distress and reduces quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of drug therapy for the treatment of faecal incontinence. In particular, to assess the effects of individual drugs relative to placebo or other drugs, and to compare drug therapy with other treatment modalities.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register of Trials, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and MEDLINE in process, and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 21 June 2012) and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials were included in this systematic review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened abstracts, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of the included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen trials were identified, including 558 participants. Eleven trials were of cross-over design. Eleven trials included only people with faecal incontinence related to liquid stool (either chronic diarrhoea, following ileoanal pouch or rectal surgery, or due to use of a weight-reducing drug). Two trials were amongst people with weak anal sphincters, one in participants with faecal impaction and bypass leakage, and one in geriatric patients. In one trial there was no specific cause for faecal incontinence.Seven trials tested anti-diarrhoeal drugs to reduce faecal incontinence and other bowel symptoms (loperamide, diphenoxylate plus atropine, and codeine). Six trials tested drugs that enhance anal sphincter function (phenylepinephrine gel and sodium valproate). Two trials evaluated osmotic laxatives (lactulose) for the treatment of faecal incontinence associated with constipation in geriatric patients. One trial assessed the use of zinc-aluminium ointment for faecal incontinence. No studies comparing drugs with other treatment modalities were identified.There was limited evidence that antidiarrhoeal drugs and drugs that enhance anal sphincter tone may reduce faecal incontinence in patients with liquid stools. Loperamide was associated with more adverse effects (such as constipation, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, headache and nausea) than placebo. However, the dose may be titrated to the patient's symptoms to minimise side effects while achieving continence. The drugs acting on the sphincter sometimes resulted in local dermatitis, abdominal pain or nausea. Laxative use in geriatric patients reduced faecal soiling and the need for help from nurses.Zinc-aluminium ointment was associated with improved quality of life, with no reported adverse effects. However, the observed improvement in quality of life was seen in the placebo group as well as the treatment group.It should be noted that all the included trials in this review had small sample sizes and short duration of follow-up. 'Risk of bias' assessment was unclear for most of the domains as there was insufficient information. There were no data suitable for meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The small number of trials identified for this review assessed several different drugs in a variety of patient populations. The focus of most of the included trials was on the treatment of diarrhoea, rather than faecal incontinence. There is little evidence to guide clinicians in the selection of drug therapies for faecal incontinence. Larger, well-designed controlled trials, which use the recommendations and principles set out in the CONSORT statement, and include clinically important outcome measures, are required.

Comparison of bulking agents in the treatment of fecal incontinence: a prospective randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

We sought to compare two synthetic injectable bulking agents, with known efficacy (PTQ™: a silicone biomaterial and Durasphere(®): pyrolytic carbon-coated beads), in the form of a randomised clinical trial.

METHODS

Circumferential injection of either agent was performed under local anesthesia and sedation as a day-case procedure. The primary outcome measure was the Wexner incontinence scale. Secondary measures were the short-form 36 (SF-36) quality of life assessment and manometry (maximum resting and squeeze pressures). Follow-up was at 6 weeks, 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients were randomised, 17 to PTQ(®) and 18 to Durasphere(®). Early closure of the trial occurred, due to the removal of the agent PTQ(®), from the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits scheme. Wexner incontinence scores were significantly better than baseline, in both groups, at 6 weeks and 6 months (P < 0.05), although the improvements were not significant at 12 months. There was no significant improvement for either agent, from baseline, in mean SF-36 scores at any follow-up sessions. There was no significant difference between the two bulking agents, with regard to both Wexner and SF-36 scores, at any of the follow-up sessions. Complications occurred in one patient in the PTQ group (perianal abscess) and did not occur in any of the patients in the Durasphere group.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial appears to show that both synthetic agents PTQ(®) and Durasphere(®) are effective and safe, although long-term improvement is limited. In this trial, there appears to be no difference in efficacy between the two agents, over a 12-month follow-up period.

Perianal injectable bulking agents as treatment for faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a complex and distressing condition with significant medical and social implications. Injection of perianal bulking agents has been used to treat the symptoms of passive faecal incontinence. However, various agents have been used without a standardised technique and the supposed benefit of the treatment is largely anecdotal with a limited clinical research base.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of perianal injection of bulking agents for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register of trials (25 May 2012), ZETOC (3 May 2012), clinical trials registries (3 May 2012) and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing the use of injectable bulking agents for faecal incontinence with any alternative treatments or placebo were reviewed to evaluate the therapeutic effects. Case-control and cohort studies were also reviewed to assess risks and complications associated with the treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (YM and CN) assessed the methodological quality of eligible trials and independently extracted data from the included trials using a range of pre-specified outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

Five eligible randomised trials with a total of 382 patients were identified. Four of the trials were at an uncertain or high risk of bias.Most trials reported a short term benefit from injections regardless of the material used, including placebo saline injection. One study demonstrated dextranomer in stabilised hyaluronic acid (NASHA Dx) to be more effective than sham injection but with more adverse effects. Dextranomer in stabilised hyaluronic acid (NASHA Dx) was better than sham injections at six months (65/136, 48% versus 48/70, 69% participants not improved, defined as less than 50% reduction in incontinence episodes, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88; with more incontinence free days (3.1 days compared with 1.7 in the sham treatment group, MD 1.40 days, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.47). Another study comparing silicone material (PTQ™) to saline injections was too small to demonstrate a clinical benefit compared to the control injection of normal saline.A silicone biomaterial (PTQ™) was shown to provide some advantages and was safer in treating faecal incontinence than carbon-coated beads (Durasphere®) in the short term.Similarly, there were short term benefits from injections delivered under ultrasound guidance compared with digital guidance.No long term evidence on outcomes was available and further conclusions were not warranted from the available data. None of the studies reported patient evaluation of outcomes and thus it is difficult to gauge whether the improvement in incontinence scores matched practical symptom improvements that mattered to the patients.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

One large randomised controlled trial has shown that this form of treatment using dextranomer in stabilised hyaluronic acid (NASHA Dx) improves continence for a little over half of patients in the short term. However, the number of identified trials was limited and most had methodological weaknesses.

[Pelvic floor and anal incontinence. Conservative therapy]

Conservative treatment of fecal incontinence and obstructive defecation can be treated by many conservative treatment modalities. This article presents the options of medication therapy, spincter exercises, electric stimulation, transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, anal irrigation and injection of bulking agents. These methods are presented with reference to the currently available literature but the evidence-based data level for all methods is low. For minor disorders of anorectal function these conservative methods can lead to an improvement of anorectal function and should be individually adapted.

Biofeedback and/or sphincter exercises for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a particularly embarrassing and distressing condition with significant medical, social and economic implications. Anal sphincter exercises (pelvic floor muscle training) and biofeedback therapy have been used to treat the symptoms of people with faecal incontinence. However, standards of treatment are still lacking and the magnitude of alleged benefits has yet to be established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of biofeedback and/or anal sphincter exercises/pelvic floor muscle training for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 24 January 2012) which contains trials from searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE and handsearching of conference proceedings; and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials evaluating biofeedback and/or anal sphincter exercises in adults with faecal incontinence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed the risk of bias of eligible trials and two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials. A wide range of outcome measures were considered.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty one eligible studies were identified with a total of 1525 participants. About half of the trials had low risk of bias for randomisation and allocation concealment.One small trial showed that biofeedback plus exercises was better than exercises alone (RR for failing to achieve full continence 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.94).One small trial showed that adding biofeedback to electrical stimulation was better than electrical stimulation alone (RR for failing to achieve full continence 0.47, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.65).The combined data of two trials showed that the number of people failing to achieve full continence was significantly lower when electrical stimulation was added to biofeedback compared against biofeedback alone (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.78).Sacral nerve stimulation was better than conservative management which included biofeedback and PFMT (at 12 months the incontinence episodes were significantly fewer with sacral nerve stimulation (MD 6.30, 95% CI 2.26 to 10.34).There was not enough evidence as to whether there was a difference in outcome between any method of biofeedback or exercises. There are suggestions that rectal volume discrimination training improves continence more than sham training. Further conclusions are not warranted from the available data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The limited number of identified trials together with methodological weaknesses of many do not allow a definitive assessment of the role of anal sphincter exercises and biofeedback therapy in the management of people with faecal incontinence. We found some evidence that biofeedback and electrical stimulation may enhance the outcome of treatment compared to electrical stimulation alone or exercises alone. Exercises appear to be less effective than an implanted sacral nerve stimulator. While there is a suggestion that some elements of biofeedback therapy and sphincter exercises may have a therapeutic effect, this is not certain. Larger well-designed trials are needed to enable safe conclusions.

Plugs for containing faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a distressing disorder with high social stigma. Not all people with faecal incontinence can be cured with conservative or surgical treatment and they may need to rely on containment products, such as anal plugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the performance of different types of anal plugs for containment of faecal incontinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 29 February 2012). Reference lists of identified trials were searched and plugs manufacturers were contacted for trials. No language or other limitations were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: This review was limited to randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (including crossovers) of anal plug use for the management of faecal incontinence.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Children and adults with faecal incontinence.Types of interventions: Any type of anal plug. Comparison interventions might include no treatment, conservative (physical) treatments, nutritional interventions, surgery, pads and other types or sizes of plugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data from the included trials. Authors of all included trials were contacted for clarification concerning methodological issues.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 136 participants were included. Two studies compared the use of plugs versus no plugs, one study compared two sizes of the same brand of plug, and one study compared two brands of plugs. In all included studies there was considerable dropout (in total 48 (35%) dropped out before the end of the study) for varying reasons. Data presented are thus subject to potential bias. 'Pseudo-continence' was, however, achieved by some of those who continued to use plugs, at least in the short-term. In a comparison of two different types of plug, plug loss was less often reported and overall satisfaction was greater during use of polyurethane plugs than polyvinyl-alcohol plugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data were limited and incomplete, and not all pre-specified outcomes could be evaluated. Consequently, only tentative conclusions are possible. The available data suggest that anal plugs can be difficult to tolerate. However, if they are tolerated they can be helpful in preventing incontinence. Plugs could then be useful in a selected group of people either as a substitute for other forms of management or as an adjuvant treatment option. Plugs come in different designs and sizes; the review showed that the selection of the type of plug can impact on its performance.

Predicting improvement in urinary and bowel incontinence for home health patients using electronic health record data

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to discover which patient and support system characteristics and interventions documented by home health clinicians were associated with improvement in urinary and bowel incontinence contrasting logistic regression and data mining approaches.

SUBJECTS AND SETTING

Seventeen hundred ninety-three patients in this study experienced 2072 episodes of care. The study sample comprised all nonmaternity patients aged 18 years or older receiving skilled home health services in 2004. Subjects were drawn from a convenience sample of 15 home health agencies .

DESIGN

We completed a secondary analysis of data from 15 home health agencies' electronic health records. Data for this study were documented by home care clinicians using the Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS) structured assessment form and the Omaha System interventions, which is a standardized terminology.

RESULTS

There were 684 patients with urinary incontinence and 187 with bowel incontinence. By discharge 38% improved in urinary incontinence and 45% improved their bowel incontinence. Using logistic regression, no patient or support system characteristics were identified that associated with improvement in either urinary or bowel incontinence, only a limited number of interventions were significant. A data mining decision tree was producible only for bowel incontinence, demonstrating a combination of patient and support system factors as well as selected interventions were important in determining whether patients would improve in bowel incontinence.

CONCLUSIONS

Home health patients have complex comorbid conditions requiring home care nurses to have broad, generalized knowledge. Future research is needed to determine if the inclusion of a certified WOC nurse would improve outcomes.

Nonoperative management of fecal incontinence

Fecal incontinence is a significant health problem that affects quality of life. Continence may often be improved with changes in diet with or without pharmacologic treatment to optimize the consistency of stool. Biofeedback is a multifaceted therapeutic approach that helps an individual improve his or her sensitivity to rectal distention and respond with appropriate voluntary sphincter control. One or more of these techniques can be used in conjunction with education and supportive counseling to optimize an individual's continence.

Evaluation and treatment of anal incontinence, constipation, and defecatory dysfunction

Posterior compartment disorders include anal incontinence, constipation, and defecatory dysfunction. These disorders cause considerable morbidity, and are typically underreported by patients and undertreated by providers. The purpose of this article is outline the approach to diagnosis and treatment of anal incontinence, constipation, and defecatory dysfunction with a brief description of the nature of the problem and approaches to evaluation and diagnosis, as well as medical and surgical management.

Outcomes of combination treatment of fecal incontinence in women

OBJECTIVE

To describe how women with fecal incontinence (FI) respond to combined pharmacologic therapy and pelvic floor muscle exercises (PFME).

STUDY DESIGN

Validated questionnaires (Fecal Incontinence Severity Index and Modified Manchester Health Questionnaire) were mailed to 80 women who received combined therapy for FI and had complete baseline assessments. Regression models were constructed to identify predictors of change in questionnaire scores.

RESULTS

Response rate was 69%. Mean age was 59 +/- 12 years. All women were taught PFME with digital palpation, and 87% of the women received medications. FI severity scores and quality-of-life (QOL) improved from baseline to follow-up (P < .001 and P = .02, respectively). A fair/normal external anal sphincter (EAS) contraction resulted in greater improvements in FI severity (13 points, P = .006) and QOL scores (22 points, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

FI severity and QOL improved after combination therapies, and a fair/normal EAS contraction predicted greater improvement.

Sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence and constipation in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence and constipation are disabling conditions that reduce quality of life. If conservative treatment fails, one option is sacral nerve stimulation (SNS), a minimally invasive technique allowing modulation of the nerves and muscles of the pelvic floor and hindgut.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of SNS for faecal incontinence and constipation in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 24 April 2007) and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials assessing the effects of SNS for faecal incontinence or constipation in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results, assessed the methodological quality of the included studies, and undertook data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

Three crossover studies were included. Two, enrolling 34 (Leroi) and two participants (Vaizey), assessed the effects of SNS for faecal incontinence, and one (Kenefick), enrolling two participants, assessed SNS for constipation. In the study by Leroi, following the crossover period, participants, while still blinded, chose the period of stimulation they had preferred. Outcomes at different time points were reported separately for 19 participants who preferred the 'on' and five who preferred the 'off' period. For the group of 19, the median (range) episodes of faecal incontinence per week fell from 1.7 (0 to 9) during the 'off' period to 0.7 (0 to 5) during the 'on' period; for the group of five, however, the median (range) rose from 1.7 (0 to 11) during the 'off' period compared with 3.7 (0 to 11) during the 'on' period. Vaizey reported an average of six, and one, episodes of faecal incontinence per week during the 'off' and 'on' periods respectively. Leroi reported that four of 27 participants experienced an adverse event resulting in removal of the stimulator; Vaizey did not report adverse events. For SNS for constipation, during the 'off' crossover period the participants experienced an average of two bowel movements per week, compared with five during the 'on' period. Abdominal pain and bloating occurred 79% of the time during the 'off' period compared with 33% during the 'on' period. No adverse events occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The very limited evidence from the included studies suggests that SNS can improve continence in selected people with faecal incontinence, and reduce symptoms in selected people with constipation. However temporary, percutaneous stimulation for a two-to-three week period does not always successfully identify those for whom a permanent implant will be beneficial. Larger, good quality randomised crossover trials are needed to allow the effects of SNS for these conditions to be assessed with more certainty.

Electrical stimulation for faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a particularly embarrassing and distressing condition with significant medical, social and economic implications. Electrical stimulation has been used with apparent success in the treatment of faecal incontinence. However, standards of treatment are still lacking and the magnitude of alleged benefits has yet to be established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of electrical stimulation for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 13 March 2007) and reference lists of potentially eligible articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials evaluating electrical stimulation in adults with faecal incontinence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality of potentially eligible trials and independently extracted data from the included trials. A wide range of outcome measures were considered.

MAIN RESULTS

Four eligible trials with 260 participants were identified. Findings from one trial suggest that electrical stimulation with anal biofeedback and exercises provides more short-term benefits than vaginal biofeedback and exercises for women with obstetric-related faecal incontinence. Another study found contradictory results, with no added benefit from electrical stimulation over biofeedback and exercises alone. Although all trials report that patient's symptoms are generally improved, it is not clear that this is the effect of electrical stimulation. No further conclusions could be drawn from the data available.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present, there are insufficient data to allow reliable conclusions to be drawn on the effects of electrical stimulation in the management of faecal incontinence. There is a suggestion that electrical stimulation may have a therapeutic effect, but this is not certain. Larger, more generalisable trials are needed.

Faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a life style-limiting condition with multiple aetiologies. Surgical cure is not often possible.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A review of the literature was undertaken using Medline, Cochrane database and standard textbooks. Advanced imaging techniques now inform the treatment algorithm and objectively assess success. The long-term outcome of anal surgery is uncertain. Modern approaches favour conservative measures, such as biofeedback, and less invasive surgical procedures. Stoma formation is a definitive option for some patients.

CONCLUSION

Current treatment of faecal incontinence is evolving from a sphincter-focused view to a more holistic one, recognizing the influence of the pelvic floor and psyche in maintaining continence. Modern imaging modalities direct treatment strategies.

Biofeedback and/or sphincter exercises for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a particularly embarrassing and distressing condition with significant medical, social and economic implications. Anal sphincter exercises and biofeedback therapy have been used to treat the symptoms of people with faecal incontinence. However, standards of treatment are still lacking and the magnitude of alleged benefits has yet to be established.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of biofeedback and/or anal sphincter exercises/pelvic floor muscle training for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Trials Register (searched 27 February 2006) and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials evaluating biofeedback and/or anal sphincter exercises in adults with faecal incontinence.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality of eligible trials and two reviewers independently extracted data from included trials. A wide range of outcome measures were considered.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven eligible studies were identified with a total of 564 participants. In all but three trials methodological quality was poor or uncertain. No study reported a major difference in outcome between any method of biofeedback or exercises and any other method, or compared to other conservative management. There are suggestions that rectal volume discrimination training improves continence more than sham training and that anal biofeedback combined with exercises and electrical stimulation provides more short-term benefits than vaginal biofeedback and exercises for women with obstetric-related faecal incontinence. Further conclusions are not warranted from the available data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The limited number of identified trials together with their methodological weaknesses do not allow a definitive assessment of the possible role of anal sphincter exercises and biofeedback therapy in the management of people with faecal incontinence. We found no evidence of biofeedback or exercises enhancing the outcome of treatment compared to other conservative management methods. While there is a suggestion that some elements of biofeedback therapy and sphincter exercises may have a therapeutic effect, this is not certain. Larger well-designed trials are needed to enable safe conclusions.

Plugs for containing faecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a distressing disorder with high social stigma. Not all people with faecal incontinence can be cured with conservative or surgical treatment and they may need to rely on containment products, such as anal plugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the performance of different types of anal plugs for containment of faecal incontinence.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 22 November 2004), MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2004), CINAHL (January 1982 to November Week 3 2004), EMBASE (January 1996 to 2004 Week 47), INVERT (Dutch nursing database) (January 1993 to November 2004) and Web of Science (January 1988 to November 2004). Reference lists of identified trials were searched and plugs manufacturers were contacted for trials. No language or other limitations were imposed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: This review was limited to randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (including crossovers) of anal plug use for the management of faecal incontinence.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Children and adults with faecal incontinence. Types of interventions: Any type of anal plug. Comparison interventions might include no treatment, conservative (physical) treatments, nutritional interventions, surgery, pads and other types or sizes of plugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data from the included trials. Authors of all included trials were contacted for clarification concerning methodological issues.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies with a total of 136 participants were included. Two studies compared the use of plugs versus no plugs, one study compared two sizes of the same brand of plug, and one study compared two brands of plugs. In all included studies there was considerable dropout (in total 48 (35%) dropped out before the end of the study) for varying reasons. Data presented are thus subject to potential bias. 'Pseudo-continence' was, however, achieved by some of those who continued to use plugs, at least in the short-term. In a comparison of two different types of plug, plug loss was less often reported and overall satisfaction was greater during use of polyurethane plugs than polyvinyl-alcohol plugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data were limited and incomplete, and not all pre-specified outcomes could be evaluated. Consequently, only tentative conclusions are possible. The available data suggest that anal plugs can be difficult to tolerate. However, if they are tolerated they can be helpful in preventing incontinence. Plugs could then be useful in a selected group of people either as a substitute for other forms of management or as an adjuvant treatment option. Plugs come in different designs and sizes; the review showed that the selection of the type of plug can impact on its performance.

Drug treatment for faecal incontinence in adults

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence is a common symptom which causes significant distress and reduction in quality of life. Available treatment options for faecal incontinence include conservative treatments (biofeedback, pelvic floor muscle training, dietary manipulation or drug therapy) or surgical treatments (e.g. sphincter repair, post anal repair, neosphincter). Drug treatment is often given either alone or in combination with other treatment modalities.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of drug therapy for the treatment of faecal incontinence. In particular, to assess the effects of individual drugs relative to placebo or other drugs, and to compare drug therapy with other treatment modalities.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group trials register (January 2003) and the reference lists of relevant articles. Date of the most recent search: January 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of the use of pharmacological agents for the treatment of faecal incontinence in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Working independently, reviewers selected studies from the literature, assessed the methodological quality of each trial, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials were identified for inclusion in this review. Nine trials were of cross-over design. Seven trials included only people with faecal incontinence related to liquid stool (either chronic diarrhoea or following ileoanal pouch surgery). Three trials (total 58 participants) compared topical phenylephrine gel with placebo. Two trials (56 participants) compared loperamide with placebo. One trial (11 participants) compared loperamide oxide with placebo. One trial (15 participants) compared diphenoxylate plus atropine with placebo. One trial (17 participants) compared sodium valproate with placebo. One trial (30 participants) compared loperamide with codeine with diphenoxylate plus atropine. Two further trials (total 265 participants) assessed the use of lactulose in elderly people.No studies comparing drugs with other treatment modalities were identified. There was limited evidence that antidiarrhoeal drugs and drugs which enhance anal sphincter tone may reduce faecal incontinence in patients with liquid stools. However, the trials were small and of short duration.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The small number of trials identified for this review assessed several different drugs in a variety of patient populations. The focus of most of the included trials was on the treatment of diarrhoea, rather than faecal incontinence. There is little evidence to guide clinicians in the selection of drug therapies for faecal incontinence. Larger, well-designed controlled trials, which include clinically important outcome measures, are required.