Retrograde colonic irrigation for faecal incontinence after low anterior resection

Systematic review of the management options available for low anterior resection syndrome (LARS)

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer incidence is increasing. Low anterior resection is currently the gold standard surgical management. Postoperatively, patients may present with symptoms indicative of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). LARS can be debilitating and is difficult to treat with low efficacy of treatment modalities. This systematic review aims to highlight the current evidence regarding LARS management.

METHODS

Systematic review of Medline, Cochrane and Embase used the following terms: "low anterior resection syndrome" AND "management", "low anterior resection syndrome" AND "treatment". Articles that focus solely of low anterior resection syndrome management in patients > 18 years were included. Bias risk was assessed via the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies and the JBI critical appraisal tool for randomized controlled trials. Due to heterogeneity of methodology, no statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight articles with a total of 1914 patients were included in this review. Ninety-five per cent underwent surgery for malignancy. Treatment options included pharmacology, pelvic floor rehabilitation (PFR), transanal irrigation (TAI), sacral nerve modulation (SNM), percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) and "treatment programs" starting from the least invasive procedures escalating to more invasive treatments upon failure. The most common published medical therapies report Ramoestron use; however, studies are low impact. PFR showed significant improvement in LARS mostly in those with symptoms of faecal incontinence. However, long-term outcomes are inconsistent. TAI supplies pseudo-continence with its greatest benefit reported in those with incomplete evacuation. TAI has significant short-term effects on LARS but little long-term effect. TAI is also associated with a significant drop-out rate. SNM's hypothesised benefit is extrapolated from non-LARS associated FI. Results show improvements in FI but a high rate of explantation. PTNS evidence suggests little if any significant LARS improvement. A single "stepwise programme" study reported that 77 per cent did not progress further than diet and medication. Little evidence suggests benefit regarding diet or acupuncture.

DISCUSSION

There is no consensus as to the optimal treatment strategy for LARS. LARS is multifactorial and requires sensitive discussion between patient and surgeon to address the most prominent symptom. It requires physical and psychological input. No single treatment option provides superior results. Treatment is based on symptom control and patient acceptance.

Long-Term Outcomes of Transanal Irrigation for Bowel Dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

Transanal irrigation (TAI) improves bowel function and quality of life in patients with neurogenic bowel disease compared to conservative bowel care. Its use has been extended to a range of defecatory disorders. However, data on long-term benefits and compliance are lacking. We aim to evaluate the long-term efficacy of TAI by examining compliance and patient outcomes over a five-year period.

METHODS

This study is a five-year retrospective review of patients practising TAI in a district general hospital. Patient demographics, indications, long-term compliance, adverse events, and patient-reported Qufora bowel symptom bother scores were analysed.

RESULTS

A cohort of 18 patients had a median age of 61 (range 23-91) and were predominantly female (83.5%). The reasons for bowel dysfunction were diverse: low anterior resection syndrome, neurogenic bowel, congenital anorectal malformations, obstructed defecation, and functional disorders. Predominant symptoms were constipation (9), faecal incontinence (7), and mixed (2). Both high-volume (catheter and cone) and low-volume (mini cone) irrigation devices were used. Fourteen patients continued regular irrigation at a median follow-up of 27.7 months (range 5.1-72.3), while four had discontinued at a median follow-up of 4.8 months. The reasons for discontinuation were inadequate rectal evacuation and spontaneous improvement of symptoms. In the compliant group, there was a significant improvement in bowel symptom scores (p=0.003). No major adverse events, such as significant rectal bleeding or perforation, were noted.

CONCLUSION

In this small cohort, TAI was safe and effective for long-term use; however, a fifth of patients discontinued treatment. Further work needs to be done to identify those patients who will benefit from TAI.

Transanale Irrigation als Geheimtipp

Funktionelle Störungen nach Rektumresektion, die unter der Definition „low anterior resection syndrome“ (LARS) zusammengefasst werden, beeinträchtigen bei vielen operierten Patienten zum Teil massiv die Lebensqualität. Nachdem die transanale Irrigation (TAI) bei ähnlicher Problematik anderer Genese als erfolgreiche Option zum Einsatz gekommen ist, wurde sie auch bei Patienten mit bereits länger bestehendem LARS angewandt. Als Folge der deutlichen Verbesserung der Rektumfunktion durch diese Therapie wurde auch eine prophylaktische Anwendung unmittelbar nach Verschluss der protektiven Ileostomie diskutiert und im Rahmen einer kontrollierten, randomisierten Studie untersucht. Dabei zeigte sich eine signifikante Reduktion der Anzahl der Defäkationsepisoden (bei Tag und Nacht), des LARS-Scores sowie des Wexner-Inkontinenz-Scores in den ersten 3 Monaten. Obwohl der positive Effekt der TAI eine Empfehlung als Therapieoption bei LARS nahelegt, verbleiben noch offene Fragen (notwendiges Irrigationsvolumen, Intervalle zwischen den Irrigationen, Behandlungsdauer) als Basis für zukünftige Untersuchungen.

A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial of Transanal Irrigation Versus Conservative Treatment in Patients With Low Anterior Resection Syndrome After Rectal Cancer Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate transanal irrigation (TAI) as a treatment for low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).

BACKGROUND

LARS is a bowel disorder that is common after sphincter preserving rectal cancer surgery. Despite symptomatic medical treatment of LARS many patients still experience bowel symptoms that may have a negative impact on quality of life (QoL). TAI is a treatment strategy, of which the clinical experience is promising but scientific evidence is limited.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicenter randomized trial comparing TAI (intervention) with conservative treatment (control) was performed. Inclusion criteria were major LARS, age above 18 years, low anterior resection with anastomosis and a defunctioning stoma as primary surgery, >6 months since stoma reversal, anastomosis without signs of leakage or stricture, and no signs of recurrence at 1-year follow-up. The primary endpoint was differences in bowel function at 12-month follow-up measured by LARS score, Cleveland Clinic Florida Fecal Incontinence Score, and 4 study-specific questions. The secondary outcome was QoL.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients were included, 22 in the TAI group and 23 in the control group. Follow-up was available for 16 and 22 patients, respectively. At 12 months, patients in the TAI group reported significantly lower LARS scores (22.9 vs 32.4; P =0.002) and Cleveland Clinic Florida Fecal Incontinence Score (6.4 vs 9.2; P =0.050). In addition, patients in the TAI group also scored significantly higher QoL [8 of 16 European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) QoL aspects] compared with the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm our clinical experience that TAI reduces symptoms included in LARS and improves QoL.

Bowel Dysfunction after Low Anterior Resection for Colorectal Cancer: A Frequent Late Effect of Surgery Infrequently Treated

BACKGROUND

The development of major low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after low anterior resection is severely detrimental to quality of life, yet awareness of it by clinicians and patients and the frequency of treatment of LARS is unclear.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients who underwent low anterior resection for sigmoid or rectal cancer at a tertiary center between 2007 and 2017 (n = 798) were surveyed in 2019 to assess LARS symptoms and report medications or treatment received for LARS. LARS scores were calculated (score range 0-42) and normalized to published data on LARS prevalence in the general population in Europe, stratified by age (<50 or ≥50) and sex.

RESULTS

Of the 594 patients (74%) who returned the survey, 255 (43%) were identified as having major LARS (LARS score ≥30). This prevalence was significantly higher than published normative data from Denmark and Amsterdam when stratified by age greater than or less than 50 and sex. Patients with major LARS infrequently reported current use of first-line therapies (antidiarrheal medications 32%, fiber supplements 16%, and both 13%). Only 3% reported receiving second-line therapy of transanal irrigations and/or pelvic floor rehabilitation, and only 1% had undergone third-line therapy of sacral nerve stimulator implantation.

CONCLUSION

Major LARS is common yet seemingly underrecognized by clinicians because less than half of patients are on first-line therapy and practically none are on second- and third-line therapies. Long-term follow-up of patients after low anterior resection, improved preoperative and postoperative education, and continued symptom assessment is necessary to improve treatment of major LARS.

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).

Managing Bowel Symptoms After Sphincter-Saving Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Scoping Review

CONTEXT

Rectal cancer is common and it is often treated by surgery with or without chemoradiation. Cancer treatment frequently results in bowel symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

The review aim was to chart the management options for bowel symptoms following rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

A scoping review was undertaken searching nine healthcare databases, using relevant search terms and Boolean operators following PRISMA-ScR guidance. Data were extracted into an Excel spreadsheet using headings from the United Kingdom Department of Health guidance and are reported narratively.

RESULTS

30 heterogeneous studies met the inclusion criteria, including 853 patients. The most commonly reported bowel symptom was fecal incontinence; the most frequent management strategy was sacral nerve stimulation. Most studies reported on a single management option, often used to manage more than one bowel symptom. Often failure to satisfactorily improve symptoms using options such as medication was needed prior to progressing to other management options. In some studies more than one management option was used, such as rehabilitation programmes.

CONCLUSION

It is likely that to effectively manage the bowel symptoms experienced after rectal cancer treatment, more than one management option may be used-. Additionally, different management options may need to be tried concurrently.

Using transanal irrigation in the management of low anterior resection syndrome: a service audit

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a collection of symptoms that can occur as a result of a low anterior resection for bowel cancer. Transanal irrigation (TAI) can be used to manage these symptoms. This article describes a retrospective audit of 15 patients who were using TAI to manage symptoms of LARS. The aim of the audit was to ascertain whether the use of TAI improved outcomes for these patients. The data suggest that TAI has reduced both the frequency of bowel movements and episodes of faecal incontinence. Those patients using higher volumes of water seem to have experienced more benefit than those patients using lower volumes of water. These findings are consistent with current literature around TAI for LARS and suggest research into optimum volume of water would be beneficial.

Anterior resection syndrome: a randomized clinical trial of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (ramosetron) in male patients with rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

No effective treatment exists for anterior resection syndrome (ARS) following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. This RCT assessed the safety and efficacy of a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, ramosetron, for ARS.

METHODS

A single-centre, randomized, controlled, open-label, parallel group trial was conducted. Male patients with ARS 1 month after rectal cancer surgery or ileostomy reversal were enrolled and randomly assigned (1 : 1) to 5 μg of ramosetron (Irribow®) daily or conservative treatment for 4 weeks. Low ARS (LARS) score was calculated after randomization and 4 weeks after treatment. The study was designed as a superiority test with a primary endpoint of the proportion of patients with major LARS between the groups. Primary outcome analysis was based on the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events during the study.

RESULTS

: A total of 100 patients were randomized to the ramosetron (49 patients) or conservative treatment group (51 patients). Two patients were excluded, and 48 and 50 patients were analysed in the ramosetron and control groups, respectively. The proportion of major LARS after 4 weeks was 58 per cent (28 of 48 patients) in the ramosetron group versus 82 per cent (41 of 50 patients) in the control group, with a difference of 23.7 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 5.58 to 39.98, P = 0.011). There were minor adverse events in five patients, which were hard stool, frequent stool or anal pain. These were not different between the two groups. There were no serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

: Ramosetron could be safe and feasible for male patients with ARS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02869984 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Assessment and management of low anterior resection syndrome after sphincter preserving surgery for rectal cancer

Many patients develop a variety of bowel dysfunction after sphincter preserving surgeries (SPS) for rectal cancer. The bowel dysfunction usually manifests in the form of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), which has a negative impact on the patients’ quality of life. This study reviewed the LARS after SPS, its mechanism, risk factors, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment based on previously published studies. Adequate history taking, physical examination of the patients, using validated questionnaires and other diagnostic tools are important for assessment of LARS severity. Treatment of LARS should be tailored to each patient. Multimodal therapy is usually needed for patients with major LARS with acceptable results. The treatment includes conservative management in the form of medical, pelvic floor rehabilitation and transanal irrigation and invasive procedures including neuromodulation. If this treatment failed, fecal diversion may be needed. In conclusion, Initial meticulous dissection with preservation of nerves and creation of a neorectal reservoir during anastomosis and proper Kegel exercise of the anal sphincter can minimize the occurrence of LARS. Pre-treatment counseling is an essential step for patients who have risk factors for developing LARS.

Transanal Irrigation for Neurogenic Bowel Disease, Low Anterior Resection Syndrome, Faecal Incontinence and Chronic Constipation: A Systematic Review

Transanal irrigation (TAI) has received increasing attention as a treatment option in patients with bowel dysfunction. This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and evaluates the effect of TAI in neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD), low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), faecal incontinence (FI) and chronic constipation (CC). The primary outcome was the effect of TAI on bowel function. Secondary outcomes included details on TAI, quality of life (QoL), the discontinuation rate, adverse events, predictive factors for a successful outcome, and health economics. A systematic search for articles reporting original data on the effect of TAI on bowel function was performed, and 27 eligible studies including 1435 individuals were included. Three randomised controlled trials, one non-randomised trial, and 23 observational studies were included; 70% of the studies were assessed to be of excellent or good methodological quality. Results showed an improvement in bowel function among patients with NBD, LARS, FI, and CC with some studies showing improvement in QoL. However, discontinuation rates were high. Side effects were common, but equally prevalent among comparative treatments. No consistent predictive factors for a successful outcome were identified. Results from this review show that TAI improves bowel function and potentially QoL; however, evidence remains limited.

Nurse-led standardized intervention for low anterior resection syndrome. A population-based pilot study

AIM

Our aim was to study the implementation of the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score in a clinical setting and to evaluate a nurse-led standardized intervention for bowel dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery.

METHOD

All patients who underwent curatively intended, restorative rectal cancer resection in a single centre between 2012 and 2016 were screened using the LARS score. At clinical follow-up, patients with major LARS were offered treatment in a nurse-led clinic. Data were retrospectively collected from patients' electronic medical records.

RESULTS

In total, 190 out of 286 (66%) patients were screened with the LARS score of whom 89 had major LARS. A total of 86 patients requested treatment for their bowel dysfunction and the majority obtained acceptable function after nurse-led optimized conservative treatment. Seventeen patients went on to transanal irrigation, and seven patients were treated with biofeedback. Five patients were referred for surgery, three for gastroenterological evaluation. After treatment in the clinic, patients achieved a statistically significant decrease in median LARS score from 37 (interquartile range 34-39) to 31 (interquartile range 23-34) (P < 0.001), and the prevalence of major LARS fell from 95% to 53% (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Screening for LARS was not optimal as one-third of patients were not screened. The majority of patients with major LARS requested treatment for their symptoms and could be successfully treated with standardized interventions managed in a nurse-led setting.

Japanese Practice Guidelines for Fecal Incontinence Part 2-Examination and Conservative Treatment for Fecal Incontinence- English Version

Examination for fecal incontinence is performed in order to evaluate the condition of each patient. As there is no single method that perfectly assesses this condition, there are several tests that need to be conducted. These are as follows: anal manometry, recto anal sensitivity test, pudendal nerve terminal motor latency, electromyogram, anal endosonography, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, and defecography. In addition, the mental and physical stress most patients experience during all these examinations needs to be taken into consideration. Although some of these examinations mostly apply for patients with constipation, we hereby describe these tests as tools for the assessment of fecal incontinence. Conservative therapies for fecal incontinence include diet, lifestyle, and bowel habit modification, pharmacotherapy, pelvic floor muscle training, biofeedback therapy, anal insert device, trans anal irrigation, and so on. These interventions have been identified to improve the symptoms of fecal incontinence by determining the mechanisms resulting in firmer stool consistency; strengthening the pelvic floor muscles, including the external anal sphincter; normalizing the rectal sensation; or periodic emptying of the colon and rectum. Among these interventions, diet, lifestyle, and bowel habit modifications and pharmacotherapy can be performed with some degree of knowledge and experience. These two therapies, therefore, can be conducted by all physicians, including general practitioners and other physicians not specializing in fecal incontinence. However, patients with fecal incontinence who did not improve following these initial therapies should be referred to specialized institutions. Contrary to the initial therapies, specialized therapies, including pelvic floor muscle training, biofeedback therapy, anal insert device, and trans anal irrigation, should be conducted in specialized institutions as these require patient education and instructions based on expert knowledge and experience. In general, conservative therapies should be performed for fecal incontinence before surgery because its pathophysiologies are mostly attributed to benign conditions. All Japanese healthcare professionals who take care of patients with fecal incontinence are expected to understand the characteristics of each conservative therapy, so that appropriate therapies will be selected and performed. Therefore, in this chapter, the characteristics of each conservative therapy for fecal incontinence are described.

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Low anterior resection syndrome is a highly prevalent condition that can develop after anal sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer and impair quality of life. In this review, we summarize the major features and pathophysiology of this syndrome and discuss treatment approaches.

RECENT FINDINGS

Quality of life correlates significantly with severity of low anterior resection syndrome. Prompt assessment and initiation of therapy are essential to rehabilitating damaged mechanical and neural structures. Anorectal manometry demonstrates a global decrease in sphincteric function postoperatively, though in many patients, function does recover. Transanal irrigation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, and biofeedback are the mainstays of the treatment of major LARS. Definitive stoma can be considered in therapy refractory LARS > 2 years. The development of low anterior resection syndrome likely involves an interplay between mechanical and neural pathways. Clinically, patients present at varying levels of severity, and scoring systems are available to help assess patient symptoms and guide therapy. Treatment approaches range from conservative therapies to biofeedback and sacral nerve stimulation. Future randomized controlled trials aimed at risk stratification of patients and development of severity-based treatment algorithms are warranted.

Long-term functional results and quality of life after redo rectal surgery: delayed versus immediate colo-anal anastomosis

AIM

To compare the functional results and quality of life after delayed colo-anal anastomosis (DCAA) or immediate colo-anal anastomosis (ICAA) following redo rectal surgery.

METHOD

Twenty-six patients with DCAA between 2014 and 2018 were studied retrospectively (group A). Two control groups were used: 26 ICAA after redo surgery (group B) and 52 colo-anal anastomosis (CAA) after anterior resection (group C). Control groups were matched for age, sex, pelvic radiotherapy and time to surgery. Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) scores were used to assess function and quality of life.

RESULTS

The indications for surgery were comparable for groups A and B: anastomotic failure with chronic sepsis (38% vs 50%, P = 0.40), vaginal fistula (42% vs 42%, P = 1) and urinary fistula (20% vs 8%, P = 0.22) as well as the number of previous abdominal operations (1.3 ± 0.9 vs 1.1 ± 0.6, P = 0.19). The median LARS score in the first 2 years was 30 [interquartile range (IQR) 14-41] for group A, 23 (IQR 0-41) for group B and 22 (IQR 11-37) for group C. After 2 years, the median LARS score improved in each group [A, 21 (IQR 11-35); B, 18 (IQR 5-26); C, 13 (IQR 9-20)], but was still high in group A. There was a tendency toward more major LARS in group A than in group B (46% vs 27%; P = 0.149). There was no difference in the mean GIQLI score between groups A and B (120 ± 16 vs 117 ± 19; P = 0.53) at the end of the follow-up period. Time after stoma closure (< 2 years) and previous radiotherapy were risk factors for major LARS in all populations.

CONCLUSION

ICAA should be the procedure of choice where possible in redo surgery as it has better functional outcomes.

Etiology and management of low anterior resection syndrome based on the normal defecation mechanism

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) commonly develops after an anal sphincter-preserving operation (SPO). The etiology of LARS is not well understood, as the anatomical components and physiological function of normal defecation, which may be damaged during the SPO, are not well established. SPOs may damage components of the anal canal (such as the internal anal sphincter, longitudinal conjoint muscle, or hiatal ligament), either mechanically or via injury to the nerves that supply these organs. The function of the rectum is substantially impaired by resection of the rectum, division of the rectococcygeus muscle, and/or injury of the nervous supply. When the remnant rectum is small and does not function properly, an important functional role may be played by the neorectum, which is usually constructed from the left side of the colon. Hypermotility of the remnant colon may affect the manifestation of urge fecal incontinence. To develop an SPO that minimizes the risk of LARS, the anatomy and physiology of the structures involved in normal defecation need to be understood better. LARS is managed similarly to fecal incontinence. In particular, management should focus on reducing colonic motility when urge fecal incontinence is the dominant symptom.

Randomized clinical trial of prophylactic transanal irrigation versus supportive therapy to prevent symptoms of low anterior resection syndrome after rectal resection

Background

Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is a frequent problem after rectal resection. Transanal irrigation (TAI) has been suggested as an effective treatment in patients who have developed LARS. This prospective RCT was undertaken to evaluate the effect of TAI as a prophylactic treatment to prevent symptoms of LARS.

Methods

Patients who had undergone ultralow rectal resection were randomized to start TAI on a daily basis, or to serve as a control with supportive therapy only after ileostomy closure. All patients were seen after 1 week, 1 month and 3 months, and the maximum number of defaecation episodes per day and night documented during follow‐up. Wexner score, LARS score and Short Form 36 questionnaire responses were evaluated in both groups.

Results

Thirty‐seven patients could be evaluated according to protocol (TAI 18, control 19). The maximum number of stool episodes per day and per night was significantly lower among patients who underwent TAI at 1 month (median 3 versus 7 episodes/day in TAI versus control group, P = 0·003; 0 versus 3 episodes/night, P = 0·001) and 3 months (3 versus 5 episodes per day, P = 0·006; 0 versus 1 episodes/night, P = 0·002). LARS scores were significantly better in the TAI group after 1 month (median 16 versus 32 in control group; P = 0·044) and 3 months (9 versus 31; P = 0·001). A significantly better result in terms of Wexner score was seen in the TAI group after 3 months (median 2 versus 6 in controls; P = 0·046).

Conclusion

Prophylactic TAI led to a significantly better functional outcome compared with supportive therapy for up to 3 months. Registration number: DRKS00011752 ( http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/).

Anterior resection syndrome: What should we tell practitioners and patients in 2018?

Multidisciplinary management of infra-peritoneal rectal cancer has pushed back the frontiers of sphincter preservation, without impairment of carcinological outcome. However, functional intestinal sequelae, grouping together several symptoms known under the name of anterior resection syndrome (ARS), have emerged and become an increasingly frequent concern for both patients and physicians. The pathophysiology is complex: ARS is a combination in various degrees of stool frequency, incontinence for flatus and/or stools, urgency, and disorders in discrimination and evacuation. The "Low Anterior Resection Score" (LARS), validated in 2012, is currently used to evaluate the severity of ARS and its impact on quality of life. While ARS can show improvement over the first two years, symptoms persist for longer than two years in nearly 60% of patients and in half of these patients, ARS is considered severe. The most frequently reported independent risk factors of severe ARS include neo-adjuvant radiation therapy, the extent of resection (total mesorectal excision that includes inter-sphincteric resection), absence of colonic pouch and anastomotic leak. In the absence of surgical complications and/or local recurrence, physicians can draw from a wide therapeutic armamentarium in order to improve the functional outcome of patients, including diet and lifestyle modifications, gut motility regulators, multimodal rehabilitation (biofeedback, electro-stimulation) and sacral nerve modulation. Permanent colostomy is an alternative of last resort, proposed only when all other solutions fail. A better understanding of the natural history of ARS, its risk factors as well as the array of therapeutic alternatives should provide better patient information and optimize management.

Role of transanal irrigation in the treatment of anterior resection syndrome

BACKGROUND

Transanal irrigation(TAI) has been reported to be an inexpensive and effective treatment for low anterior resection syndrome(LARS). The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate the use of TAI in patients with significant LARS symptoms at a single medical center.

METHODS

Patients who had low anterior resection for rectal cancer between April 2015 and May 2016 at the Careggi University Hospital were assessed for LARS using the LARS and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Bowel Function Instrument (MSKCC BFI) questionnaires 30-40 days after  surgery or ileostomy closure (if this was done). Quality of life was evaluated using a visual analog scale and the Short Form-36 Health Survey. All patients with LARS score of 30 or higher were included (early LARS) as were all patients with a LARS score of 30 or higher referred 6 months or longer after surgery performed elsewhere (chronic LARS) in the same study period. Study participants were trained to perform TAI using the Peristeen™ System for 6 months, followed by 3 months of enema therapy following a similar protocol.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients were enrolled in the study. Six patients stopped the treatment. The 27 patients (19 early LARS and 8 chronic LARS) who completed the study had a significant decrease in the number of median daily bowel movements [baseline 7 (range 0-14); 6 months 1 (range 0-4); 9 months 4 (range 0-13)]. The median LARS Score fell from 35.1 (range 30-42) (baseline) to 12.2 (range 0-21) after 6 months (p < 0.0001) and then rose to 27 (range 5-39) after 3 months of enema therapy. There was no difference in LARS score decrease at 6 months between the patients with early and chronic LARS (22.5 and 23.9 respectively; p=0.7) and there were no predictors of score decrease. Four components of the SF-36 significantly improved during the TAI period. The MSKCC BFI score significantly improved in several domains. Twenty-three patients (85%) asked to continue the treatment with TAI after the study ended.

CONCLUSIONS

TAI appears to be an effective treatment for LARS and results in a marked improvement of continence and quality of life.  Patients may be assessed and treated for LARS early after surgery since the treatment benefit is similar to that observed in patients with LARS diagnosed  6 months or longer after surgery. The potential rehabilitative role of TAI for LARS is promising and should be further investigated.

Treatment possibilities for low anterior resection syndrome: a review of the literature

AIM

Up to 80% of patients after low anterior resection, experience (low) anterior resection syndrome (ARS/LARS). However, there is no standard treatment option currently available. This systemic review aims to summarize treatment possibilities for LARS after surgical treatment of rectal cancer in the medical literature.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched using the terms anterior resection syndrome, low anterior resection, colorectal/rectal/rectum, surgery/operation, pelvic floor rehabilitation, biofeedback, transanal irrigation, sacral nerve stimulation, and tibial nerve stimulation. All English language articles presenting original patient data regarding treatment and outcome of LARS were included. We focused on the effects of different treatment modalities for LARS. The Jadad score was used to assess the methodological quality of trials. The quality scale ranges from 0 to 5 points, with a score ≤ 2 indicating a low quality report, and a score of ≥ 3 indicating a high quality report.

RESULTS

Twenty-one of 160 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 8 were reporting sacral nerve stimulation, 6 were designed to determine pelvic floor rehabilitation, 3 studies evaluated the effect of transanal irrigation, 2-percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, and the rest of the studies assessed probiotics and 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists for LARS in patients who had undergone rectal resection. All except one study were poor quality reports according to the Jadad score.

CONCLUSIONS

LARS treatment still carries difficulties because of a lack of well-conducted, randomized multicenter trials. Well-performed randomized controlled trials are needed.

Acceptability and benefit of rectal irrigation in patients with Low Anterior Resection Syndrome: a qualitative study

AIM

Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) following rectal cancer surgery impairs the patient's quality of life (QoL). Rectal Irrigation has been demonstrated to be effective for anterior resection syndrome but many surgeons do not suggest it as a treatment. This feasibility study aimed to explore treatment acceptability and the benefit of rectal irrigation in patients who developed LARS following an anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study, involving semi-structured interviews. Twenty-one patients diagnosed with LARS following anterior resection for rectal cancer in a single tertiary centre were offered rectal irrigation as a treatment option. Qualitative interviews (n=17) were conducted at baseline to explore patient reported impact of LARS on QoL, treatment acceptability and factors influencing the decision to accept/decline treatment. Follow up interviews were carried out at six months for the treatment group only (n=12), to assess its practicality and impact on QoL.

RESULTS

Qualitative interview findings suggest rectal irrigation is an acceptable method of treatment for LARS. Participants who perceived their symptoms to be more severe or poorly controlled were most likely to consider rectal irrigation as a treatment option. The patients who completed treatment reported improvements in their QoL, the ability to control the time of defaecation being the key benefit CONCLUSION: Clinicians should consider offering rectal irrigation as a treatment option to patients presenting with bowel dysfunction following anterior resection as it can improve symptoms. Patients who perceive that their symptoms are severe are more likely to consider treatment. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Prospective evaluation of transanal irrigation for fecal incontinence and constipation

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of transanal irrigation on bowel function and quality of life in a prospective cohort of Danish patients with fecal incontinence or constipation.

METHODS

Patients with fecal incontinence or constipation of heterogeneous origin were treated by a specialist nurse at the Anal Physiology Clinic/Department of Surgery at Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. If satisfactory results were not obtained after conservative bowel management, patients were instructed in the use the transanal irrigation procedure and were consecutively recruited for this observational cohort study in the period from March 2010 to September 2013. Patients completed questionnaires regarding bowel function, quality of life and the transanal irrigation procedure at baseline and after 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 507 were introduced to transanal irrigation. Eighty-three percent were females. The median age was 56 (range 19-86) years. At follow-up, 216 (43%) patients still used transanal irrigation, 174 (34%) reported that they had discontinued the treatment for various reasons, while no response was obtained from the remaining 117 (23%) patients. The main reason for not adhering to the treatment was an unsatisfactory outcome, which was reported by 86 (49.4%) of those who discontinued the treatment. Among patients still using the procedure at follow-up, a statistically significant improvement of bowel function scores (St. Marks/Wexner incontinence score, Wexner constipation score and obstructed defecation syndrome score) was detected: the Wexner incontinence score decreased from 12.4 at baseline to 10.2 at follow-up (p < 0.001); the St. Marks incontinence score decreased from 14.9 to 12.7 (p < 0.001); the Wexner constipation score decreased from 14.3 to 12.4 (p < 0.001); and the obstructed defecation syndrome score also dropped, from 15.1 to 11.8 (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the influence of bowel dysfunction on daily activities and quality of life diminished significantly, while the general satisfaction with bowel function increased significantly (p < 0.001 in all three measures).

CONCLUSIONS

Bowel function and quality of life improved in the group of patients adhering to transanal irrigation after 12 months. However, more than one-third of the patients discontinued the treatment within the first year with transanal irrigation. Thus, further studies are needed in order to identify factors predicting success and failure with this treatment and to improve supervision during initiation and follow-up.

Treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with a novel colonic irrigation system: a pilot study

Background

Medical treatments for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are often disappointing. A colonic irrigation system, the Ashong colonic irrigation apparatus (ACIA), was designed as a patient-administered device for defecation disorders. This pilot study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ACIA for IBS.

Methods

Eighteen patients, 12 with constipation-dominant IBS (IBS-C) and 6 with diarrhea-dominant IBS (IBS-D) group, were studied. Patients were randomized into treatments of 1–4 weeks. Colonic irrigation was performed twice daily for 6 consecutive days per week. To determine the response to treatment, bowel movement frequency, stool consistency, abdominal pain, patient satisfaction with bowel movements, and distress/discomfort due to symptoms were assessed.

Results

The scores of abdominal pain (p < 0.001), satisfaction (p < 0.001), and distress/discomfort (p < 0.001) improved significantly. The frequency of bowel movements in the IBS-C group increased from 1.68 to 3.78 times per week (p < 0.001). The occurrence of Bristol Stool Scale type 1 and 2 stool passage decreased from 45 to 13 % (p = 0.009) in the IBS-C group and type 6 and 7 stools decreased from 62 to 28 % (p = 0.005) in the IBS-D group. Only mild adverse events occurred, and all patients completed treatment.

Conclusions

Colonic irrigation with ACIA is safe and can improve abdominal pain, constipation, and diarrhea associated with IBS. Patients were more satisfied with their bowel movements and found their symptoms were less disturbing. Larger studies on long-term efficacy and quality of life and on placebo effects are needed.

Faecal incontinence: Current knowledges and perspectives

Faecal incontinence (FI) is a disabling and frequent symptom since its prevalence can vary between 5% and 15% of the general population. It has a particular negative impact on quality of life. Many tools are currently available for the treatment of FI, from conservative measures to invasive surgical treatments. The conservative treatment may be dietetic measures, various pharmacological agents, anorectal rehabilitation, posterior tibial nerve stimulation, and transanal irrigation. If needed, patients may have miniinvasive approaches such as sacral nerve modulation or antegrade irrigation. In some cases, a surgical treatment is proposed, mainly external anal sphincter repair. Although these different therapeutic options are available, new techniques are arriving allowing new hopes for the patients. Moreover, most of them are non-invasive such as local application of an α1-adrenoceptor agonist, stem cell injections, rectal injection of botulinum toxin, acupuncture. New more invasive techniques with promising results are also coming such as anal magnetic sphincter and antropylorus transposition. This review reports the main current available treatments of FI and the developing therapeutics tools.

The functional results of radical rectal cancer surgery: review of the literature

Introduction For more than the last 20 years, low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) is a gold standard for rectal cancer treatment. Oncological outcomes have improved significantly and now more and more reports of functional outcomes appear. Due to the close relationship between the rectum and pelvic nerves, bowel, bladder, and sexual function are frequently affected during TME. Methods A search for published data was performed using the MEDLINE database (from 1 January 2005 to 31 January 2015) to perform a systematic review of the studies that described anorectal, bladder, and sexual dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the MINORS criteria. Results Eighty-nine studies were eligible for analysis. Up to 76% of patients undergoing sphincter preserving surgery will have changes in bowel habits, the so-called "low anterior resection syndrome" (LARS). The duration of LARS varies between a few months and several years. Pre-operative radiotherapy, damage of anal sphincter and pelvic nerves, and height of the anastomosis are the risk factors for LARS. There is no evidence-based treatment available for LARS. Sexual function is more commonly affected after rectal surgery than after urinary function. The main cause of dysfunction is damage to pelvic nerves. Sexual and bladder functional outcomes in females are less well reported. Laparoscopic and robotic surgery allows better visualization of autonomic nerves and, therefore, more precise dissection and preservation. Conclusions It is important that rectal resection is standardized as much as possible, and that new functional outcome research use the same validated outcome questionnaires. This would allow for a high-quality meta-analysis.

The risk of definitive stoma formation at 10 years after low and ultralow anterior resection for rectal cancer

AIM

The long-term risk of definitive stoma after sphincter-saving resection (SSR) for rectal cancer is underestimated and has never been reported for ultralow conservative surgery. We report the 10-year risk of definitive stoma after SSR for low rectal cancer.

METHOD

From 1994 to 2008, patients with low rectal cancer who were suitable for SSR were analysed retrospectively. Patients were divided into the following four groups: low colorectal anastomosis (LCRA); coloanal anastomosis (CAA); partial intersphincteric resection (pISR); and total intersphincteric resection (tISR). The end-point was the risk of a definitive stoma according to the type of anastomosis.

RESULTS

During the study period, 297 patients had SSR for low rectal cancer. The incidence of definitive stoma increased from 11% at 1 year to 22% at 10 years. The reasons were no closure of the loop ileostomy (4.7%), anastomotic morbidity (6.5%), anal incontinence (8%) and local recurrence (5.2%). The risk of definitive stoma was not influenced by type of surgery: 26% vs 18% vs 18% vs 19% (P = 0.578) for LCRA, CAA, pISR and tISR, respectively. Independent risk factors for definitive stoma were age > 65 years and surgical morbidity.

CONCLUSION

The risk of a definitive stoma after SSR increased two-fold between 1 and 10 years after surgery, from 11% to 22%. Ultralow conservative surgery (pISR and tISR) did not increase the risk of definitive stoma compared with conventional CAA or LCRA.

Biofeedback Therapy Before Ileostomy Closure in Patients Undergoing Sphincter-Saving Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Pilot Study

Purpose

This study prospectively investigated the effects of biofeedback therapy on objective anorectal function and subjective bowel function in patients after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer.

Methods

Sixteen patients who underwent an ileostomy were randomized into two groups, one receiving conservative management with the Kegel maneuver and the other receiving active biofeedback before ileostomy closure. Among them, 12 patients (mean age, 57.5 years; range, 38 to 69 years; 6 patients in each group) completed the study. Conservative management included lifestyle modifications, Kegel exercises, and medication. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after ileostomy closure by using anal manometry, modified Wexner Incontinence Scores (WISs), and fecal incontinence quality of life (FI-QoL) scores.

Results

Before the ileostomy closure, the groups did not differ in baseline clinical characteristics or resting manometric parameters. After 12 months of follow-up, the biofeedback group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the mean maximum squeezing pressure (from 146.3 to 178.9, P = 0.002). However, no beneficial effect on the WIS was noted for biofeedback compared to conservative management alone. Overall, the FI-QoL scores were increased significantly in both groups after ileostomy closure (P = 0.006), but did not differ significantly between the two groups.

Conclusion

Although the biofeedback therapy group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the maximum squeezing pressure, significant improvements in the WISs and the FI-QoL scores over time were noted in both groups. The study was terminated early because no therapeutic benefit of biofeedback had been demonstrated.

Pelvic floor rehabilitation to improve functional outcome after a low anterior resection: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Impaired functional outcome is common after a low anterior resection (LAR). Pelvic floor rehabilitation (PFR) might improve functional outcome after a LAR. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of PFR in improving functional outcome.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched using the terms fecal incontinence, colorectal neoplasm/surgery, LAR, rectal cancer, anterior resection syndrome, bowel habit, pelvic floor, training, therapy, physical therapy, rehabilitation and biofeedback. Of the 125 identified records, 5 articles were included.

RESULTS

The 5 included studies reported on 321 patients, of which 286 patients (89%) underwent pelvic floor training. Three studies included patients with anterior resection syndrome after a LAR while the remaining studies included a series of patients after a LAR. Functional outcome was mostly assessed by using the Wexner incontinence scale. Quality of life was assessed in one study, and in three studies, rectal manometry was performed. After PFR, the functional outcome was improved in four studies, as was the quality of life.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review demonstrated that PFR is useful for improving the functional outcome after a LAR. The data are extracted from studies of limited quality, but the available evidence points to the effectiveness of the procedure.

Impact of bowel dysfunction on quality of life after sphincter-preserving resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Bowel dysfunction after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer is a common complication, with the potential to affect quality of life (QoL) strongly. The aim of this study was to examine the extent of bowel dysfunction and impact on health-related QoL after curative sphincter-preserving resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

QoL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire, and bowel function using a validated questionnaire, including the recently developed low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. Assessments were carried out at the time of diagnosis, and at 3 and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 260 patients were included in the study. At 3 months, 58·0 per cent of patients had a LARS score of 30 or more (major LARS), which declined to 45·9 per cent at 12 months (P < 0·001). The risk of major LARS was significantly increased in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy (odds ratio 2·41, 95 per cent confidence interval 1·00 to 5·83), and after total versus partial mesorectal excision (odds ratio 2·81, 1·35 to 5·88). Global health status was closely associated with LARS, and significant differences in global health status, functional and symptom scales of QoL were found between patients without LARS and those with major LARS.

CONCLUSION

Bowel dysfunction is a major problem with an immense impact on QoL following sphincter-preserving resection. The risk of major LARS was significantly increased after neoadjuvant therapy and total mesorectal excision.

Consensus review of best practice of transanal irrigation in adults

STUDY DESIGN

Review article.

OBJECTIVES

To provide a consensus expert review of the treatment modality for transanal irrigation (TAI).

METHODS

A consensus group of specialists from a range of nations and disciplines who have experience in prescribing and monitoring patients using TAI worked together assimilating both the emerging literature and rapidly accruing clinical expertise. Consensus was reached by a round table discussion process, with individual members leading the article write-up in the sections where they had particular expertise.

RESULTS

Detailed trouble-shooting tips and an algorithm of care to assist professionals with patient selection, management and follow-up was developed.

CONCLUSION

This expert review provides a practical adjunct to training for the emerging therapeutic area of TAI. Careful patient selection, directly supervised training and sustained follow-up are key to optimise outcomes with the technique. Adopting a tailored, stepped approach to care is important in the heterogeneous patient groups to whom TAI may be applied.

SPONSORSHIP

The review was financially supported by Coloplast A/S.

Treatment options to improve anorectal function following rectal resection: a systematic review

AIM

Common problems after rectal resection are loose stools, faecal incontinence, increased frequency and evacuation difficulties, for which there are various therapeutic options. A systematic review was conducted to assess the outcome of treatment options aimed to improve anorectal function after rectal surgery.

METHOD

Publications including a therapeutic approach to improve anorectal function after rectal surgery were searched using the following databases: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Pedro, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsychInfo and the Cochrane Library. The focus was on outcome parameters of symptomatic improvement of faecal incontinence, evaluation of defaecation and quality of life.

RESULTS

The degree of agreement on eligibility and methodological quality between reviewers calculated with kappa was 0.85. Fifteen studies were included. Treatment options included pelvic floor re-education (n=7), colonic irrigation (n=2) and sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) (n=6). Nine studies reported reduced incontinence scores and a decreased number of incontinent episodes. In 10 studies an improvement in resting and squeeze pressure was observed after treatment with pelvic floor re-education or SNS. Three studies reported improved quality of life after pelvic floor re-education. Significant improvement of the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale was found in three studies after SNS.

CONCLUSION

Conservative therapies such as pelvic floor re-education and colonic irrigation can improve anorectal function. SNS might be an effective solution in selected patients. However, methodologically qualitative studies are limited and randomized controlled trials are needed to draw evidence-based conclusions.

Anterior resection syndrome

Up to 80% of patients with rectal cancer undergo sphincter-preserving surgery. It is widely accepted that up to 90% of such patients will subsequently have a change in bowel habit, ranging from increased bowel frequency to faecal incontinence or evacuatory dysfunction. This wide spectrum of symptoms after resection and reconstruction of the rectum has been termed anterior resection syndrome. Currently, no precise definition or causal mechanisms have been established. This disordered bowel function has a substantial negative effect on quality of life. Previous reviews have mainly focused on different colonic reconstructive configurations and their comparative effects on daily function and quality of life. The present Review explores the potential mechanisms underlying disturbed functions, as well as current, novel, and future treatment options.

Transanal irrigation for bowel symptoms in patients with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Constipation and fecal incontinence affect 68% of patients with multiple sclerosis, but management is empirical. Transanal irrigation has been used successfully in patients with neurogenic bowel dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of transanal irrigation on the bowel symptoms and general health status in these patients and the characteristics of those that had successful treatment and to obtain data for power calculations necessary for future randomized controlled studies.

DESIGN

This was a prospective observational study in which pre- and posttreatment questionnaires (bowel symptoms and health status) were compared. Patients for whom treatment resulted in at least 50% improvement in bowel symptoms were considered responders. Baseline variables including anorectal physiology tests and rectal compliance were compared between responders and nonresponders.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a specialist neurogastroenterology clinic, tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Included were 30 patients who had multiple sclerosis and constipation, fecal incontinence, or both.

INTERVENTION

Transanal irrigation was performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the Wexner Constipation and Wexner Incontinence scores. The secondary outcomes was the SF-36 health survey. All scores were recorded before and after 6 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

At 6 weeks posttreatment, the Wexner Constipation score significantly improved (12 (8.75/16) pretreatment vs 8 (4/12.5) posttreatment, p = 0.001), as well as the Wexner Incontinence score (12 (4.75/16) pretreatment vs 4 (2/8) posttreatment, p < 0.001). The SF-36 score did not improve significantly (51.3 ± 7.8 pretreatment vs 50.4 ± 7.8 posttreatment, p = 0.051). Sixteen patients were responders and had higher baseline Wexner Incontinence scores (14 (11/20) responders vs 9 (4/15) nonresponders, p = 0.038) and SF-36 (53.9 ± 6.3 responders vs 47.9 ± 7.8 nonresponders, p = 0.027), as well as greater maximum tolerated volume to rectal balloon distension (310 (220/320) mL responders vs 168 (108/305) mL nonresponders, p = 0.017) and rectal compliance (15.2 (14.5/17.2) mL/mmHg responders vs 9.2 (7.2/15.3) mL/mmHg nonresponders, p = 0.019).

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its small sample size and the lack of control group with alternative treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal irrigation is effective to treat bowel symptoms in patients with multiple sclerosis. Responders (53%) had higher baseline incontinence symptoms and better perception of their health, as well as a more capacious and compliant rectum.

Transanal irrigation improves quality of life in patients with low anterior resection syndrome

AIM

Transanal irrigation (TAI) has been reported to be a cheap and effective treatment for the 'anterior resection syndrome (ARS)'. This study aimed to evaluate its effect on the quality of life (QOL) of patients suffering from ARS.

METHOD

In a prospective study involving two colorectal centres, 14 patients (11 male; median age 68 (45-80) years) were included in the study. The median duration of ARS was 19 (9-48) months. The median number of defaecations was 8 (4-12)/day and 3 (2-5)/night. All patients were trained to perform TAI using the Peristeen™ System under the guidance of a stoma nurse. Anal physiology was performed, quality of life (QOL) was estimated by the SF-36 and Rockwood (ASCRS) questionnaires and continence by the Cleveland Incontinence Score.

RESULTS

At the last follow up the median time of using TAI was 29 (15-46) months. The median volume of water used for the irrigation was 900 (500-1500) ml. There was a significant decrease in the number of defaecations during the day (baseline, 8 [4-12]; last follow up, 1 [1-2]) and at night (baseline, 3 [2-5]; last follow up, 0 [0-0]). The Cleveland Incontinence Score fell from 17 [15-20] (baseline) to 5 [4-9] (last follow up) and the mental component of the SF-36 and all domains of the Rockwood QOL instrument improved.

CONCLUSION

Transanal irrigation is an effective treatment of anterior resection syndrome and results in a marked improvement of the continence score and QOL.

Management of fecal incontinence after treatment for rectal cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anorectal dysfunction constitutes a major problem in patients surviving rectal cancer. In this review, the current options for management of fecal incontinence after treatment for rectal cancer are discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

First line therapy should be conservative measures aimed at symptomatic control. Dietary regiments, fibers, constipating agents and enemas may be tried. Biofeedback is an option to strengthen the external anal sphincter, improve rectal sensitivity and coordinate pelvic floor muscles. Colonic irrigation has been successful to reduce symptoms and improve quality of life. Surgical interventions may be considered if conservative management fails. Sacral nerve stimulation is a successful minimal invasive procedure for the treatment of fecal incontinence; however, evidence of the method after treatment for rectal cancer is still limited. Complex surgical procedures should be limited to only highly selected patients. A stoma should be considered when other treatment modalities have failed.

SUMMARY

Systematic evaluation of the postoperative anorectal function in patients treated for rectal cancer should be a standard practice at every follow-up. An individually tailored treatment should be offered to the severely affected patients to minimize their symptoms. The evidence on the most commonly used treatments is sparse, therefore, further randomized controlled studies are needed.

Transanal irrigation for disordered defecation: a systematic review

Transanal irrigation for treatment of disordered defecation has been widely used among caregivers. Unique in its simplicity, reversible and minimally invasive, transanal irrigation has begun to find its place in the treatment hierarchy. Scheduled transanal irrigation aims to ensure emptying of the left colon and rectum. This prevents faecal leakage between washouts, providing a state of pseudocontinence, and re-establishes control over the time and place of defecation. Furthermore, regular evacuation of the rectosigmoid prevents constipation. The studies presented in this review represent the continuum of increasing evidence and knowledge of transanal irrigation for disordered defecation: from proof in principle through better knowledge of the physiology, towards establishing the indications and ensuring the safety of the treatment. Evidence of the superiority of transanal irrigation in spinal cord injury patients with neurogenic bowel dysfunction is provided, also from a health-economic perspective. Finally, a proposal is presented for an algorithm for the introduction of transanal irrigation for disordered defecation before irreversible surgery is considered.

Review of the efficacy and safety of transanal irrigation for neurogenic bowel dysfunction

STUDY DESIGN

Neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD) is a common occurrence after spinal cord injury (SCI) and in patients with spina bifida or multiple sclerosis. The impact of NBD on well-being is considerable, affecting both physical and psychological aspects of quality of life. Transanal irrigation (TAI) of the colon promotes the evacuation of faeces by introducing water into the colon and rectum through a catheter inserted into the anus. Regular and controlled evacuation in this manner aims at preventing both constipation and faecal soiling.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to review current evidence for the efficacy and safety of TAI in patients with NBD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed. All identified papers were assessed for relevance based on the title and abstract; this yielded 23 studies that were considered to be of direct relevance to the topic of the review.

RESULTS

A multicentre, randomized, controlled trial has supported observational reports in demonstrating that TAI offers significant benefits over conservative bowel management in patients with SCI, in terms of managing constipation and faecal incontinence, reducing NBD symptoms and improving quality of life. Among other populations with NBD, TAI shows the greatest promise in children with spina bifida; however, further investigation is required. The overall safety profile of TAI is good, with few, and rare, adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Building on the positive data reported for patients with SCI, continued evaluation in the clinical trial setting is required to further define the utility of TAI in other populations with NBD.