Literature DB >> 16773492

Electrical stimulation and pelvic floor muscle training with biofeedback in patients with fecal incontinence: a cohort study of 281 patients.

M P Terra1, A C Dobben, B Berghmans, M Deutekom, C G M I Baeten, L W M Janssen, G E E Boeckxstaens, A F Engel, R J F Felt-Bersma, J F M Slors, M F Gerhards, A B Bijnen, E Everhardt, W R Schouten, P M M Bossuyt, J Stoker.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Pelvic floor rehabilitation is an appealing treatment for patients with fecal incontinence but reported results vary. This study was designed to assess the outcome of pelvic floor rehabilitation in a large series of consecutive patients with fecal incontinence caused by different etiologies.
METHODS: A total of 281 patients (252 females) were included. Data about medical history, anal manometry, rectal capacity measurement, and endoanal sonography were collected. Subgroups of patients were defined by anal sphincter complex integrity, and nature and possible underlying causes of fecal incontinence. Subsequently patients were referred for pelvic floor rehabilitation, comprising nine sessions of electric stimulation and pelvic floor muscle training with biofeedback. Pelvic floor rehabilitation outcome was documented with Vaizey score, anal manometry, and rectal capacity measurement findings.
RESULTS: Vaizey score improved from baseline in 143 of 239 patients (60 percent), remained unchanged in 56 patients (23 percent), and deteriorated in 40 patients (17 percent). Mean Vaizey score reduced with 3.2 points (P < 0.001). A Vaizey score reduction of >or= 50 percent was observed in 32 patients (13 percent). Mean squeeze pressure (+5.1 mmHg; P = 0.04) and maximal tolerated volume (+11 ml; P = 0.01) improved from baseline. Resting pressure (P = 0.22), sensory threshold (P = 0.52), and urge sensation (P = 0.06) remained unchanged. Subgroup analyses did not show substantial differences in effects of pelvic floor rehabilitation between subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic floor rehabilitation leads overall to a modest improvement in severity of fecal incontinence, squeeze pressure, and maximal tolerated volume. Only in a few patients, a substantial improvement of the baseline Vaizey score was observed. Further studies are needed to identify patients who most likely will benefit from pelvic floor rehabilitation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16773492     DOI: 10.1007/s10350-006-0569-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  12 in total

1.  Consensus conference on faecal incontinence.

Authors:  C Baeten; D C C Bartolo; P A Lehur; K Matzel; M Pescatori; B Roche; N S Williams
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 2.  Current management of fecal incontinence: choosing amongst treatment options to optimize outcomes.

Authors:  Julie Ann M Van Koughnett; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-12-28       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Efficacy of biofeedback plus transanal stimulation in the management of pelvic floor dyssynergia: a randomized trial.

Authors:  F Cadeddu; F Salis; E De Luca; I Ciangola; G Milito
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 4.  [Management of complications of fissure and fistula surgery].

Authors:  Andreas Ommer
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 5.  Continence disorders after anal surgery--a relevant problem?

Authors:  A Ommer; F A Wenger; T Rolfs; M K Walz
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2008-07-16       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Electrical stimulation therapy in chronic functional constipation: five years' experience in patients refractory to biofeedback therapy and with rectal hyposensitivity.

Authors:  Kee Wook Jung; Dong-Hoon Yang; In Ja Yoon; So Young Seo; Hyun Sook Koo; Hyo Jeong Lee; Ho Su Lee; Ji-Beom Kim; Jong Wook Kim; Soo Kyung Park; Sang Hyoung Park; Kyung Jo Kim; Byong Duk Ye; Jeong-Sik Byeon; Hwoon-Yong Jung; Suk-Kyun Yang; Jin-Ho Kim; Seung-Jae Myung
Journal:  J Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2013-07-08       Impact factor: 4.924

7.  Biofeedback therapy plus anal electrostimulation for fecal incontinence: prognostic factors and effects on anorectal physiology.

Authors:  Adamo Stefano Boselli; Ferdinando Pinna; Stefano Cecchini; Renato Costi; Federico Marchesi; Vincenzo Violi; Leopoldo Sarli; Luigi Roncoroni
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Sacral neuromodulation: does it affect the rectoanal angle in patients with fecal incontinence?

Authors:  O Uludağ; S M P Koch; R F Vliegen; C H C Dejong; W G van Gemert; C G M I Baeten
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.352

9.  Anal inspection and digital rectal examination compared to anorectal physiology tests and endoanal ultrasonography in evaluating fecal incontinence.

Authors:  Annette C Dobben; Maaike P Terra; Marije Deutekom; Michael F Gerhards; A Bart Bijnen; Richelle J F Felt-Bersma; Lucas W M Janssen; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2006-11-10       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  Can the outcome of pelvic-floor rehabilitation in patients with fecal incontinence be predicted?

Authors:  M P Terra; M Deutekom; A C Dobben; C G M I Baeten; L W M Janssen; G E E Boeckxstaens; A F Engel; R J F Felt-Bersma; J F W Slors; M F Gerhards; A B Bijnen; E Everhardt; W R Schouten; B Berghmans; P M M Bossuyt; J Stoker
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2008-01-29       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.