Literature DB >> 22961528

Randomized double-blind crossover study of alternative stimulator settings in sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence.

J Duelund-Jakobsen1, T Dudding, E Bradshaw, S Buntzen, L Lundby, S Laurberg, C Vaizey.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sacral nerve stimulation is an established treatment for faecal incontinence. Nearly half of all patients experience loss of efficacy at some point. Standard reprogramming restores efficacy for some, but not all, patients. This study aimed to determine whether alternative stimulator settings would increase treatment efficacy.
METHODS: Patients with sustained loss of efficacy were recruited from two international specialist centres. A number of alternative stimulation parameters were tested using a double-blind randomized crossover study design. Stimulation settings tested were pulse frequencies of 6.9 and 31 Hz, and pulse widths of 90 and 330 µs, compared with one standard setting of 14 Hz/210 µs. Treatment efficacy was evaluated using a disease-specific quality-of-life score (Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale, FIQLS) and a bowel habit diary completed before randomization, during the study period and after 3 months of follow-up with one preferred setting.
RESULTS: Fifteen patients were analysed. With one preferred setting, three of four subdomains in the FIQLS improved significantly. The mean(s.d.) total number of incontinence episodes dropped from 11.7(10.8) to 4.8(4.5) per 3 weeks (P = 0.011) and improvements were maintained after 3 months of follow-up. Optimal pacemaker settings were individual, but a trend towards highest patient satisfaction and improved treatment outcome was evident for high-frequency stimulation (31 Hz/210 µs), which was preferred by eight of the 15 patients.
CONCLUSION: Patients experiencing loss of efficacy can experience improvement if alternative pacemaker settings are tested. High-frequency stimulation (31 Hz/210 µs) was preferred by more than half of the patients, and improved treatment outcome was sustained at 3 months.
Copyright © 2012 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22961528     DOI: 10.1002/bjs.8867

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  10 in total

1.  A pilot study of chronic pudendal nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence for those who have failed sacral nerve stimulation.

Authors:  G P Thomas; A T George; T C Dudding; R J Nicholls; C J Vaizey
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2014-06-22       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 2.  Impact of fecal incontinence and its treatment on quality of life in women.

Authors:  Isuzu Meyer; Holly E Richter
Journal:  Womens Health (Lond)       Date:  2015-03

3.  Fecal Incontinence: Epidemiology, Impact, and Treatment.

Authors:  Katarzyna Bochenska; Anne-Marie Boller
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2016-09

Review 4.  Endpoints for therapeutic interventions in faecal incontinence: small step or game changer.

Authors:  S S C Rao
Journal:  Neurogastroenterol Motil       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 3.598

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

Authors:  Ferdinando D'Amico; Steven D Wexner; Carolynne J Vaizey; Célia Gouynou; Silvio Danese; Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 4.623

6.  Outcomes of Sacral Nerve Stimulation For Faecal Incontinence in Northern Ireland.

Authors:  G W Irwin; B V Dasari; R Irwin; D Johnston; K Khosraviani
Journal:  Ulster Med J       Date:  2017-01

7.  An intravital window to image the colon in real time.

Authors:  Nikolai Rakhilin; Aliesha Garrett; Chi-Yong Eom; Katherine Ramos Chavez; David M Small; Andrea R Daniel; Melanie M Kaelberer; Menansili A Mejooli; Qiang Huang; Shengli Ding; David G Kirsch; Diego V Bohórquez; Nozomi Nishimura; Bradley B Barth; Xiling Shen
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 14.919

Review 8.  Programming Algorithms for Sacral Neuromodulation: Clinical Practice and Evidence-Recommendations for Day-to-Day Practice.

Authors:  Paul A Lehur; Michael Sørensen; Thomas C Dudding; Charles H Knowles; Stefan de Wachter; Stefan Engelberg; Klaus E Matzel
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2020-03-09

Review 9.  Stimulation Parameters for Sacral Neuromodulation on Lower Urinary Tract and Bowel Dysfunction-Related Clinical Outcome: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Roman Assmann; Perla Douven; Jos Kleijnen; Gommert A van Koeveringe; Elbert A Joosten; Jarno Melenhorst; Stephanie O Breukink
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2020-08-24

Review 10.  Reprogramming Sacral Neuromodulation for Sub-Optimal Outcomes: Evidence and Recommendations for Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Thomas C Dudding; Paul A Lehur; Michael Sørensen; Stefan Engelberg; Maria Paola Bertapelle; Emmanuel Chartier-Kastler; Karel Everaert; Philip Van Kerrebroeck; Charles H Knowles; Lilli Lundby; Klaus E Matzel; Arantxa Muñoz-Duyos; Mona B Rydningen; Stefan de Wachter
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2021-07-15
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.