| Literature DB >> 30460379 |
Elisabet Gustafson1,2, Therese Larsson1,2, Johan Danielson3,4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the function and quality of life of Hirschsprung's Disease (HD) beyond adolescence and relate it to matched controls.Entities:
Keywords: Aganglionosis; Bowel function; Hirschsprung’s disease; Long-term; Quality of life
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30460379 PMCID: PMC6341044 DOI: 10.1007/s00383-018-4391-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pediatr Surg Int ISSN: 0179-0358 Impact factor: 1.827
Demographic data for patients and controls
| HD | Controls | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 69 | 138 | N/A |
| Women/men | 13/56 | 26/112 | N/A |
| Age at follow-up, years | 37.8 (35.5, 22–58.5) | 37.4 (36, 19.5–65) | 0.6684 |
| Height, m | 1.78 (1.8, 1.45–1,96) | 1.79 (1.82, 1.53–1,98) | 0.7775 |
| Weight, kg | 83.5 (85, 53–129) | 84.1 (82 47–125) | 0.7569 |
| Body mass index | 26 (25.8, 16.9–52.3) | 26 (25.6, 19.1–36.1) | 0.7792 |
Data are presented as frequencies or mean (median, range) as appropriate
Parameters reflecting bowel function
| HD ( | Controls ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Satisfaction with bowel function (score 1–4, 4 = very satisfied) | 3.0 (3, 1–4) | 3.3 (4, 1–4) |
|
| Number of bowel movements per week* | 12.2 (10, 2–49) | 8.3 (7, 2–15) |
|
| Stomas | 6 (8.7%) | 0 (0%) |
|
| Miller incontinence score (mean, median, range) | 1.3 (0, 0–15) | 0.8 (0, 0–8) | 0.7575 |
| Use of protection in underwear* | 1 daytime (1.6%) 1 nighttime (1.6%) | 0 daytime (0%) 0 nighttime (0%) | 0.3186 |
| Ability to feel when they need to defecate* | 1 no (1.6%) 62 yes (98.4%) | 1 no (0.7%) 137 yes (99.3%) | 0.5389 |
| Ability to discriminate between feces and flatus* | 6 no (9.5%) 57 yes (90.5%) | 14 no (10.1%) 124 yes (89.9%) | 1.0000 |
| Urgency when needing to defecate* | 20 (31.7%) | 25 (18.1%) |
|
| Soiling* | 10 (15.9%) | 3 (2.2%) |
|
| Use of loperamide or similar on a regular basis | 5 (7.2%) | 2 (1.4%) |
|
| Use of laxatives on a regular basis | 9 (13.0%) | 2 (1.4%) |
|
| Use of enemas on a regular basis* | 9 (14.3%) | 1 (0.7%) |
|
Results for satisfaction with bowel function, number of bowel movements and Miller incontinence score are presented as mean (median, range). Other parameters are presented as frequencies and percentages (within brackets). In variables marked with *patients with stomas have been omitted. P value < 0.05 is marked with bold font
Parameters reflecting urinary and sexual function
| HD | Controls | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Problems with urinary voiding | 1.3 (1, 1–3) | 1.16 (1, 1–3) |
|
| Problems with urinary leakage | 1.2 (1, 1–4) | 1.2 (1, 1–3) | 0.6241 |
| Bowel function has a negative impact on interest of sex | 1.2 (1, 1–4) | 1.1 (1, 1–4) | 0.4836 |
| Bowel function limits taking pleasure in sexual activity | 1.2 (1, 1–4) | 1.1 (1, 1–4) | 0.8471 |
| Problems with erection (males only) | 1.2 (1, 1–2) | 1.1 (1, 1–2) |
|
| Problems with ejaculation (males only) | 1.85 (1, 1–4) | 1 (1, 1–1) |
|
These questions had answers on a four-graded scale (1 = None, 2 = Some, 3 = Quite a lot, 4 = Very much). Figures are reported as mean (median and range). P value < 0.05 is marked with bold font
Fig. 1Graphical presentation of the reported incidence of how bowel function affects daily life, social life and ability to go on vacation. All categories had P < 0.05
Fig. 2SF-36 results for HD-patients and their matched controls PF Physical Function, RP Role Physical, BP Bodily Pain, GH General Health, VT Vitality, SF Social Functioning, RE Role Emotional, MH Mental Health, PCS Physical Cluster Scale, MCS Mental Cluster Scale. No differences were significant