Percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PPTNS) in faecal incontinence associated with an anal sphincter lesion: results of a prospective study

Short-term clinical and manometric outcomes of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence: a large single-centre series

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence (FI) is common, with a significant impact on quality of life. Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) is a therapy for FI; however, its role has recently been questioned. Here we report the short-term clinical and manometric outcomes in a large tertiary centre.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospective PTNS database was performed, extracting patient-reported FI outcome measures including bowel diary, the St Marks's Incontinence Score (SMIS) and Manchester Health Questionnaire (MHQ). Successful treatment was > 50% improvement in symptoms, whilst a partial response was 25-50% improvement. High-resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM) results before and after PTNS were recorded.

RESULTS

Data were available from 135 patients [119 (88%) females; median age: 60 years (range: 27-82years)]. Overall, patients reported a reduction in urge FI (2.5-1) and passive FI episodes (2-1.5; p < 0.05) alongside a reduction in SMIS (16.5-14) and MHQ (517.5-460.0; p < 0.001). Some 76 (56%) patients reported success, whilst a further 20 (15%) reported a partial response. There were statistically significant reductions in rectal balloon thresholds and an increase in incremental squeeze pressure; however, these changes were independent of treatment success.

CONCLUSION

Patients report PTNS improves FI symptoms in the short term. Despite this improvement, changes in HRAM parameters were independent of this success. HRAM may be unable to measure the clinical effect of PTNS, or there remains the possibility of a placebo effect. Further work is required to define the role of PTNS in the treatment of FI.

Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation versus sacral nerve stimulation for the treatment of faecal incontinence

Introduction

Faecal incontinence (FI) is a common condition with a significant impact on quality of life (QoL). Neuromodulation treatments delivered by members of the multidisciplinary team including sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) are options for FI refractory to conservative management. The aim of this study was to assess whether a successful treatment with one neuromodulation modality corresponds with success in the other.

Methods

A retrospective review of a prospectively managed neuromodulation database identified 15 patients who had undergone both PTNS and SNS. The definition of success of each treatment was a >50% improvement in any of The St. Mark's Incontinence Score, Manchester Health Questionnaire, or weekly faecal urgency or FI episodes.

Results

Complete data from 12 patients was available for assessment and PTNS was delivered as the first treatment in nine patients. Overall, seven patients (58%) had successful PTNS treatment, with 10 (83%) having a successful SNS trials. Of the seven patients who had successful PTNS treatment, six patients (85.4%) went on to have success with SNS. Of the five patients who failed PTNS, four (80%) went on to have SNS success. Five (71%) of those who had positive PTNS outcomes had permanent SNS implantation as their final treatment decision.

Conclusion

This study suggests that there is no clear relationship between successful PTNS treatment and an SNS trial period which may be explained by differing mechanisms of action or the potential placebo effect of PTNS. Further work is required to investigate any association in larger studies to inform clinical practice.

Importance of some technical aspects of the procedure of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation in patients with fecal incontinence

INTRODUCTION

The results of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) in the treatment of fecal incontinence (IF) are modest. The aim of the study is to assess the relationship of some technical aspects with the clinical response: location of the nerve, distal response (motor or sensory) and accommodation.

METHODS

Prospective study of patients with FI undergoing PTNS therapy. The clinical response was assessed using the Wexner scale, defecation diary and anorectal manometry.

RESULTS

32 patients were studied. The intensity of localization (proximity to the nerve) was not correlated with clinical or manometric changes. Motor response was associated with a decrease on the Wexner scale [12.12 (±5.39) to 7.71 (±4.57) P < .005], the number of episodes of passive incontinence [8.78 (±9.64) to 4.11 (±7.11) P = .025], the total number of incontinence episodes [16.11 (±16.03) to 7.78 (±11.34) P = .009] and the number of days with fecal soiling [6.89 (±5.53) to 2.56 (±4.13) P = .002] and with an increase in the length of the manometric anal canal at rest [4.55 (±0.596) to 4.95 (±0.213) P = .004]. The increase in stimulation (accommodation) was inversely correlated with the decrease in the Wexner scale (r = -0.677 P < .005) and the number of days with soiling (r = -0.650 P = .022).

CONCLUSIONS

The motor response during PTNS seems to be related to a better clinical response. The accommodation phenomenon could be associated with worse results. The proximity of the electrode to the nerve does not seem to be important as long as a good distal response is achieved.

Tools for fecal incontinence assessment: lessons for inflammatory bowel disease trials based on a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Fecal incontinence is a disabling condition affecting up to 20% of women.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated fecal incontinence assessment in both inflammatory bowel disease and non-inflammatory bowel disease patients to propose a diagnostic approach for inflammatory bowel disease trials.

METHODS

We searched on Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library for all studies on adult inflammatory bowel disease and non-inflammatory bowel disease patients reporting data on fecal incontinence assessment from January 2009 to December 2019.

RESULTS

In total, 328 studies were included; 306 studies enrolled non-inflammatory bowel disease patients and 22 studies enrolled inflammatory bowel disease patients. In non-inflammatory bowel disease trials the most used tools were the Wexner score, fecal incontinence quality of life questionnaire, Vaizey score and fecal incontinence severity index (in 187, 91, 62 and 33 studies). Anal manometry was adopted in 41.2% and endoanal ultrasonography in 34.0% of the studies. In 142 studies (46.4%) fecal incontinence evaluation was performed with a single instrument, while in 64 (20.9%) and 100 (32.7%) studies two or more instruments were used. In inflammatory bowel disease studies the Wexner score, Vaizey score and inflammatory bowel disease quality of life questionnaire were the most commonly adopted tools (in five (22.7%), five (22.7%) and four (18.2%) studies). Anal manometry and endoanal ultrasonography were performed in 45.4% and 18.2% of the studies.

CONCLUSION

Based on prior validation and experience, we propose to use the Wexner score as the first step for fecal incontinence assessment in inflammatory bowel disease trials. Anal manometry and/or endoanal ultrasonography should be taken into account in the case of positive questionnaires.

Importance of some technical aspects of the procedure of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation in patients with fecal incontinence

INTRODUCTION

The results of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) in the treatment of fecal incontinence (IF) are modest. The aim of the study is to assess the relationship of some technical aspects with the clinical response: location of the nerve, distal response (motor or sensory) and accommodation.

METHODS

Prospective study of patients with FI undergoing PTNS therapy. The clinical response was assessed using the Wexner scale, defecation diary and anorectal manometry.

RESULTS

32 patients were studied. The intensity of localization (proximity to the nerve) was not correlated with clinical or manometric changes. Motor response was associated with a decrease on the Wexner scale [12.12 (± 5.39) to 7.71 (± 4.57) p < 0.005], the number of episodes of passive incontinence [8.78 (± 9.64) to 4.11 (± 7.11) p = 0.025], the total number of incontinence episodes [16.11 (± 16.03) to 7.78 (± 11.34) p = 0.009] and the number of days with faecal soiling [6.89 (± 5.53) to 2.56 (± 4.13) p = 0.002] and with an increase in the length of the manometric anal canal at rest [4.55 (± 0.596) to 4.95 (± 0.213) p = 0.004]. The increase in stimulation (accommodation) was inversely correlated with the decrease in the Wexner scale (r = -0.677 p < 0.005) and the number of days with soiling (r = -0.650 p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

The motor response during PTNS seems to be related to a better clinical response. The accommodation phenomenon could be associated with worse results. The proximity of the electrode to the nerve does not seem to be important as long as a good distal response is achieved.

[Percutaneous posterior tibial nerve electrostimulation in urge urinary incontinence and faecal incontinence]

OBJECTIVE

The main aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve electrostimulation (P-PTNS) in urge urinary incontinence (UUI) and faecal incontinence (FI) refractory to first-line treatment. A secondary aim was to identify predictors of treatment response. To do this, we performed a 2-year analytical, longitudinal and prospective study in patients with UUI and FI treated with P-PTNS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We included patients with UUI and FI who were treated with P-PTNS and who completed the bladder/faecal incontinence diary and severity and quality of life questionnaires. We excluded patients with neurogenic UUI and those who abandoned treatment or did not complete the questionnaires. We assessed demographic and clinical variables (micturition/defecation habits pre- and postreatment), severity scales before and after treatment (ICIQ-SF, Sandvick and Wexner), subjective improvement and quality of life (IQOL and FIQL pre- and postreatment). The statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS v19.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 21 patients divided into 2 groups: -UUI group, 9 patients. After P-PTNS, there was a statistically significant improvement in diurnal (p=.018) and nocturnal (p=.016) urinary frequency, urgencies/day (p=.018), urine leakage/day (p=.027), ICIQ-SF and Sandvick (p=.018), and IQOL (p=.012). This improvement was related to exercise (p=.039) and prolapse (p=.05). -Group FI, 12 patients. After P-PTNS, there was a statistically significant improvement in defecation frequency (p=.027), incontinence (p=.012), Wexner scale (p=.007), and FIQL in its 4 dimensions (lifestyle, behaviour, embarrassment p=.005; and depression p=.008). This improvement was related to age (p=.048), time since onset (p=.044) and prolapse (p=.026).

CONCLUSIONS

The P-PTNS is effective in UUI and FI refractory to conventional treatment. Treatment response is affected by several factors.

Evaluation of the anorectal motor response after percutaneous stimulation of the posterior tibial nerve in patients with fecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

The effect of posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) on the mechanisms of anal continence has not been fully demonstrated. The aim of this study was to assess the anal manometric response after percutaneous PTNS in patients with fecal incontinence (FI).

METHODS

This was a prospective study in patients with FI undergoing 1 weekly session of percutaneous PTNS for 8 weeks. A clinical assessment (Wexner scale) and a complete study of up to 22 manometric parameters were carried out prior to treatment and 2-4 weeks after the end of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 32 patients were evaluated. After therapy, there was a decrease in the average Wexner score [12.6 (± 5.2) to 9.5 (± 5.2) (P < 0.005)] and an increase in the "anal canal length at rest" [4.55 (± 0.60) to 4.95 (± 0.21) P = 0.004], without observing variations in other manometric parameters. The decrease in the Wexner score was significantly correlated with an increase in the "pressure at 5 cm at rest" after therapy (r = 0.464 P = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, PTNS was associated with a significant decrease in the Wexner score and with an increase in the functional length of the anal canal at rest. The improvement in the Wexner scale was correlated with an increase in pressure at rest in the theoretical area of the anorectal junction.

Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (pTNS): success rate and the role of rectal capacity

PURPOSE

Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (pTNS) was originally developed to treat urinary incontinence. Recently, some case series have also documented its success in the treatment of fecal incontinence. Nevertheless, the mechanism underlying this effect remains unknown but may be related to changes in rectal capacity. The aim of this study was to investigate the success of pTNS for the treatment of fecal urge incontinence and assess the influence of rectal capacity on treatment efficacy.

METHODS

All patients undergoing pTNS for fecal incontinence between July 2009 and March 2014 were enrolled in a prospective, observational study consisting of a therapeutic regimen that lasted 9 months. Therapy success was defined as a reduction in the CCI (Cleveland Clinic incontinence) score of ≥50% and patient-reported success. Furthermore, quality of life (Rockwood's scale) and changes in anorectal physiology were recorded.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients with fecal urge incontinence were eligible, nine of whom were excluded. The success rate was 72.5%. Incontinence events and urge symptoms were significantly reduced after 3 months and at the end of therapy. The median CCI score decreased from 12 to 4 (P < 0.0001), and the quality of life was significantly improved. However, rectal capacity was not significantly related to treatment success before or after therapy. No adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate that pTNS can improve the symptoms and quality of life of patients with fecal urge incontinence. However, the study fails to demonstrate a correlation between treatment success and changes in rectal capacity.

Internal anal sphincter: Clinical perspective

OBJECTIVE

To summarise current knowledge of Internal anal sphincter.

BACKGROUND

The internal anal sphincter (IAS) is the involuntary ring of smooth muscle in the anal canal and is the major contributor to the resting pressure in the anus. Structural injury or functional weakness of the muscle results in passive incontinence of faeces and flatus. With advent of new assessment and treatment modalities IAS has become an important topic for surgeons. This review was undertaken to summarise our current knowledge of internal anal sphincter and highlight the areas that need further research.

METHOD

The PubMed database was used to identify relevant studies relating to internal anal sphincter.

RESULTS

The available evidence has been summarised and advantages and limitations highlighted for the different diagnostic and therapeutic techniques.

CONCLUSION

Our understanding of the physiology and pharmacology of IAS has increased greatly in the last three decades. Additionally, there has been a rise in diagnostic and therapeutic techniques specifically targeting the IAS. Although these are promising, future research is required before these can be incorporated into the management algorithm.

Double-blind randomised controlled trial of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation versus sham electrical stimulation in the treatment of faecal incontinence: CONtrol of Faecal Incontinence using Distal NeuromodulaTion (the CONFIDeNT trial)

BACKGROUND

Faecal incontinence (FI) is a common condition which is often under-reported. It is distressing for those suffering from it, impacting heavily on their quality of life. When conservative strategies fail, treatment options are limited. Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) is a minimally invasive outpatient treatment, shown in preliminary case series to have significant effectiveness; however, no randomised controlled trial has been conducted.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of PTNS compared with sham electrical stimulation in the treatment of patients with FI in whom initial conservative strategies have failed.

DESIGN

Multicentre, parallel-arm, double-blind randomised (1 : 1) controlled trial.

SETTING

Eighteen UK centres providing specialist nurse-led (or equivalent) treatment for pelvic floor disorders.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants aged > 18 years with FI who have failed conservative treatments and whose symptoms are sufficiently severe to merit further intervention.

INTERVENTIONS

PTNS was delivered via the Urgent(®) PC device (Uroplasty Limited, Manchester, UK), a hand-held pulse generator unit, with single-use leads and fine-needle electrodes. The needle was inserted near the tibial nerve on the right leg adhering to the manufacturer's protocol (and specialist training). Treatment was for 30 minutes weekly for a duration of 12 treatments. Validated sham stimulation involved insertion of the Urgent PC needle subcutaneously at the same site with electrical stimulation delivered to the distal foot using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and 2 weeks following treatment. Clinical outcomes were derived from bowel diaries and validated, investigator-administered questionnaires. The primary outcome classified patients as responders or non-responders, with a responder defined as someone having achieved ≥ 50% reduction in weekly faecal incontinence episodes (FIEs).

RESULTS

In total, 227 patients were randomised from 373 screened: 115 received PTNS and 112 received sham stimulation. There were 12 trial withdrawals: seven from the PTNS arm and five from the sham arm. Missing data were multiply imputed. For the primary outcome, the proportion of patients achieving a ≥ 50% reduction in weekly FIEs was similar in both arms: 39 in the PTNS arm (38%) compared with 32 in the sham arm (31%) [odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.28; p = 0.396]. For the secondary outcomes, significantly greater decreases in weekly FIEs were observed in the PTNS arm than in the sham arm (beta -2.3, 95% CI -4.2 to -0.3; p = 0.02), comprising a reduction in urge FIEs (p = 0.02) rather than passive FIEs (p = 0.23). No significant differences were found in the St Mark's Continence Score or any quality-of-life measures. No serious adverse events related to treatment were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

PTNS did not show significant clinical benefit over sham electrical stimulation in the treatment of FI based on number of patients who received at least a 50% reduction in weekly FIE. It would be difficult to recommend this therapy for the patient population studied. Further research will concentrate on particular subgroups of patients, for example those with pure urge FI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88559475.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 77. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Sacral nerve stimulation versus percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation in the treatment of severe fecal incontinence in men

BACKGROUND

Sacral nerve stimulation and percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation have been described previously as effective treatments for fecal incontinence. Nevertheless, there does not exist any study that compares the efficiency of both. The aim of this study was to compare the use of SNS and PPTNS in males with FI.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study on men with FI treated with SNS or PTNS in the Coloproctology Unit of the University General Hospital of Elche and Reina Sofia of Murcia between January 2010 and December 2011. Preoperative assessment included physical examination, anorectal manometry, and anal endosonography. Anal continence was evaluated using the Wexner continence grading system. Quality of life was evaluated using the Fecal Incontinence Quality of life Scale.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients were included (ten patients SNS and nine PPTNS). SNS improved FI in nine of the ten patients. The mean Wexner score decreased significantly from a median of 14 (12-16) (preoperative) to 4 (1-8) (6-month revision) (p = 0.007). PTNS improved FI in seven of the nine patients. The mean Wexner score decreased significantly from a median of 12 (11-19) (preoperative) to 5 (4-7) (6-month revision) (p = 0.018). Both treatments produced symptomatic improvement without statistical differences between them.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study was nonrandomized with a relatively small number of patients. PPTNS had similar efficiency to the SNS in our men population. However, more studies are necessary to exclude selection bias and analyze long-term results.