S Putta1, H J N Andreyev. 1. Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Imperial College Faculty of Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK.
Abstract
AIMS: Despite advances in pelvic radiotherapy, damage to normal tissue can lead to chronic gastrointestinal problems. The frequency with which this affects quality of life is controversial. Faecal incontinence is not widely perceived to be a major issue after pelvic radiotherapy. The aim of this paper is to review the frequency and mechanisms for the development of faecal incontinence after pelvic radiotherapy, and to review treatment options for faecally incontinent patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of original literature was carried out using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 1966 to 2005. RESULTS: The reliability of the published data is poor because patients frequently fail to admit to faecal incontinence, and because prospective studies are lacking that assess faecal incontinence as a specific end point using adequate, validated and reproducible methodology. The published rates of late new-onset faecal incontinence after pelvic radiation are between 3% and 53%. Patients treated for prostate rather than gynaecological, bladder, rectal or anal cancer may have a lower rate. Only 8-56% of affected patients state that faecal incontinence reduces their quality of life. Studies examining the physiological changes occurring after radiotherapy are generally not adequately controlled or powered, assessment of ano-rectal function is rarely comprehensive and loss of patients to follow-up frequently makes it difficult to extrapolate results to a wider population. Where there is agreement over the physiological changes that occur after radiotherapy, it is not clear at what threshold these changes cause symptoms. No prospective studies of any non-surgical treatment for faecal incontinence after radiotherapy have been published. Surgery other than colostomy probably carries a high risk of complications in this group of patients, but few data have been published. CONCLUSIONS: Now that improvements in outcome from combination treatments, including radiotherapy for pelvic cancer, are being achieved, it is time that serious attention is paid to determining how frequently significant gastrointestinal toxicity arises, and how best to optimise the quality of life of long-term survivors.
AIMS: Despite advances in pelvic radiotherapy, damage to normal tissue can lead to chronic gastrointestinal problems. The frequency with which this affects quality of life is controversial. Faecal incontinence is not widely perceived to be a major issue after pelvic radiotherapy. The aim of this paper is to review the frequency and mechanisms for the development of faecal incontinence after pelvic radiotherapy, and to review treatment options for faecally incontinentpatients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of original literature was carried out using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 1966 to 2005. RESULTS: The reliability of the published data is poor because patients frequently fail to admit to faecal incontinence, and because prospective studies are lacking that assess faecal incontinence as a specific end point using adequate, validated and reproducible methodology. The published rates of late new-onset faecal incontinence after pelvic radiation are between 3% and 53%. Patients treated for prostate rather than gynaecological, bladder, rectal or anal cancer may have a lower rate. Only 8-56% of affected patients state that faecal incontinence reduces their quality of life. Studies examining the physiological changes occurring after radiotherapy are generally not adequately controlled or powered, assessment of ano-rectal function is rarely comprehensive and loss of patients to follow-up frequently makes it difficult to extrapolate results to a wider population. Where there is agreement over the physiological changes that occur after radiotherapy, it is not clear at what threshold these changes cause symptoms. No prospective studies of any non-surgical treatment for faecal incontinence after radiotherapy have been published. Surgery other than colostomy probably carries a high risk of complications in this group of patients, but few data have been published. CONCLUSIONS: Now that improvements in outcome from combination treatments, including radiotherapy for pelvic cancer, are being achieved, it is time that serious attention is paid to determining how frequently significant gastrointestinal toxicity arises, and how best to optimise the quality of life of long-term survivors.
Authors: M Schiano di Visconte; G A Santoro; N Cracco; G Sarzo; G Bellio; M Brunner; Z Cui; K E Matzel Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2018-01-08 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Robin Krol; Robert Jan Smeenk; Emile N J T van Lin; Eric E K Yeoh; Wim P M Hopman Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Alexander P Pietsch; Rainer Fietkau; Günther Klautke; Thomas Foitzik; Ernst Klar Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2007-05-12 Impact factor: 2.571