M J Thornton1, M L Kennedy, D Z Lubowski. 1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, St. George Hospital, and University of New South Wales, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study was designed to investigate the effect of extracorporeal magnetic stimulation on anorectal function and physiology. METHODS: A pilot study comparing the physiology of ten incontinent (9 females) and five continent (4 females) patients with and without perineal magnetic stimulation (10 Hz and 50 Hz) was performed. The ten incontinent patients were treated with two sessions weekly for five weeks of perineal magnetic stimulation. At treatment completion, precontinent and postcontinent scores and resting and squeeze anal pressure were compared. Patients also reported symptom improvement and satisfaction on a linear analog scale. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 57 years. Sitting resting and squeeze anal pressures were significantly greater than lying pressures (P = 0.007, 0.047). Both 10-Hz and 50-Hz stimulation effected a significant increase in anal pressures compared with the baseline resting pressure (P = 0.005). The baseline squeeze pressures were significantly higher than the stimulated pressures compared with 50-Hz pressures (P = 0.022). After six weeks of treatment, there was a statistically significant increase in resting and squeeze anal pressures and a significant decrease in continence scores (P = 0.007, P = 0.008, P = 0.017). The mean percentage subjective improvement was 16 percent, and the mean patient satisfaction score was 3.3, positively correlating with an improvement in the continence score. CONCLUSIONS: Extracorporeal magnetic stimulation results in a significant increase in anal resting pressure irrespective of pretreatment continence. Although the subjective improvement in continence after treatment is small, there is a significant improvement in both resting pressures and patient continence scores.
PURPOSE: This study was designed to investigate the effect of extracorporeal magnetic stimulation on anorectal function and physiology. METHODS: A pilot study comparing the physiology of ten incontinent (9 females) and five continent (4 females) patients with and without perineal magnetic stimulation (10 Hz and 50 Hz) was performed. The ten incontinentpatients were treated with two sessions weekly for five weeks of perineal magnetic stimulation. At treatment completion, precontinent and postcontinent scores and resting and squeeze anal pressure were compared. Patients also reported symptom improvement and satisfaction on a linear analog scale. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 57 years. Sitting resting and squeeze anal pressures were significantly greater than lying pressures (P = 0.007, 0.047). Both 10-Hz and 50-Hz stimulation effected a significant increase in anal pressures compared with the baseline resting pressure (P = 0.005). The baseline squeeze pressures were significantly higher than the stimulated pressures compared with 50-Hz pressures (P = 0.022). After six weeks of treatment, there was a statistically significant increase in resting and squeeze anal pressures and a significant decrease in continence scores (P = 0.007, P = 0.008, P = 0.017). The mean percentage subjective improvement was 16 percent, and the mean patient satisfaction score was 3.3, positively correlating with an improvement in the continence score. CONCLUSIONS: Extracorporeal magnetic stimulation results in a significant increase in anal resting pressure irrespective of pretreatment continence. Although the subjective improvement in continence after treatment is small, there is a significant improvement in both resting pressures and patient continence scores.