Surgical Interventions and the Use of Device-Aided Therapy for the Treatment of Fecal Incontinence and Defecatory Disorders

The purpose of this clinical practice update expert review is to describe the key principles in the use of surgical interventions and device-aided therapy for managing fecal incontinence (FI) and defecatory disorders. The best practices outlined in this review are based on relevant publications, including systematic reviews and expert opinion (when applicable). Best Practice Advice 1: A stepwise approach should be followed for management of FI. Conservative therapies (diet, fluids, techniques to improve evacuation, a bowel training program, management of diarrhea and constipation with diet and medications if necessary) will benefit approximately 25% of patients and should be tried first. Best Practice Advice 2: Pelvic floor retraining with biofeedback therapy is recommended for patients with FI who do not respond to the conservative measures indicated above. Best Practice Advice 3: Perianal bulking agents such as intra-anal injection of dextranomer may be considered when conservative measures and biofeedback therapy fail. Best Practice Advice 4: Sacral nerve stimulation should be considered for patients with moderate or severe FI in whom symptoms have not responded after a 3-month or longer trial of conservative measures and biofeedback therapy and who do not have contraindications to these procedures. Best Practice Advice 5: Until further evidence is available, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation should not be used for managing FI in clinical practice. Best Practice Advice 6: Barrier devices should be offered to patients who have failed conservative or surgical therapy, or in those who have failed conservative therapy who do not want or are not eligible for more invasive interventions. Best Practice Advice 7: Anal sphincter repair (sphincteroplasty) should be considered in postpartum women with FI and in patients with recent sphincter injuries. In patients who present later with symptoms of FI unresponsive to conservative and biofeedback therapy and evidence of sphincter damage, sphincteroplasty may be considered when perianal bulking injection and sacral nerve stimulation are not available or have proven unsuccessful. Best Practice Advice 8: The artificial anal sphincter, dynamic graciloplasty, may be considered for patients with medically refractory severe FI who have failed treatment or are not candidates for barrier devices, sacral nerve stimulation, perianal bulking injection, sphincteroplasty and a colostomy. Best Practice Advice 9: Major anatomic defects (eg, rectovaginal fistula, full-thickness rectal prolapse, fistula in ano, or cloaca-like deformity) should be rectified with surgery. Best Practice Advice 10: A colostomy should be considered in patients with severe FI who have failed conservative treatment and have failed or are not candidates for barrier devices, minimally invasive surgical interventions, and sphincteroplasty. Best Practice Advice 11: A magnetic anal sphincter device may be considered for patients with medically refractory severe FI who have failed or are not candidates for barrier devices, perianal bulking injection, sacral nerve stimulation, sphincteroplasty, or a colostomy. Data regarding efficacy are limited and 40% of patients had moderate or severe complications. Best Practice Advice 12: For defecatory disorders, biofeedback therapy is the treatment of choice. Best Practice Advice 13: Based on limited evidence, sacral nerve stimulation should not be used for managing defecatory disorders in clinical practice. Best Practice Advice 14: Anterograde colonic enemas are not effective in the long term for management of defecatory disorders. Best Practice Advice 15: The stapled transanal rectal resection and related procedures should not be routinely performed for correction of structural abnormalities in patients with defecatory disorders

Anorectal Disorders

This report defines criteria and reviews the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of the following common anorectal disorders: fecal incontinence (FI), functional anorectal pain, and functional defecation disorders. FI is defined as the recurrent uncontrolled passage of fecal material for at least 3 months. The clinical features of FI are useful for guiding diagnostic testing and therapy. Anorectal manometry and imaging are useful for evaluating anal and pelvic floor structure and function. Education, antidiarrheals, and biofeedback therapy are the mainstay of management; surgery may be useful in refractory cases. Functional anorectal pain syndromes are defined by clinical features and categorized into 3 subtypes. In proctalgia fugax, the pain is typically fleeting and lasts for seconds to minutes. In levator ani syndrome and unspecified anorectal pain, the pain lasts more than 30 minutes, but in levator ani syndrome there is puborectalis tenderness. Functional defecation disorders are defined by ≥2 symptoms of chronic constipation or irritable bowel syndrome with constipation, and with ≥2 features of impaired evacuation, that is, abnormal evacuation pattern on manometry, abnormal balloon expulsion test, or impaired rectal evacuation by imaging. It includes 2 subtypes: dyssynergic defecation and inadequate defecatory propulsion. Pelvic floor biofeedback therapy is effective for treating levator ani syndrome and defecatory disorders

First translational consensus on terminology and definitions of colonic motility in animals and humans studied by manometric and other techniques

Alterations in colonic motility are implicated in the pathophysiology of bowel disorders, but high-resolution manometry of human colonic motor function has revealed that our knowledge of normal motor patterns is limited. Furthermore, various terminologies and definitions have been used to describe colonic motor patterns in children, adults and animals. An example is the distinction between the high-amplitude propagating contractions in humans and giant contractions in animals. Harmonized terminology and definitions are required that are applicable to the study of colonic motility performed by basic scientists and clinicians, as well as adult and paediatric gastroenterologists. As clinical studies increasingly require adequate animal models to develop and test new therapies, there is a need for rational use of terminology to describe those motor patterns that are equivalent between animals and humans. This Consensus Statement provides the first harmonized interpretation of commonly used terminology to describe colonic motor function and delineates possible similarities between motor patterns observed in animal models and humans in vitro (ex vivo) and in vivo. The consolidated terminology can be an impetus for new research that will considerably improve our understanding of colonic motor function and will facilitate the development and testing of new therapies for colonic motility disorders. This Consensus Statement provides a conceptual and methodological framework to expand research on colonic motility in experimental animals and humans. The work is intended to facilitate the development of new drugs for common colonic motility disorders and of appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms for the management of paediatric and adult patients

Epidemiology, Pathophysiology and Classification of Fecal Incontinence: State of the Science Summary for the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) Workshop

In August 2013, the National Institutes of Health sponsored a conference to address major gaps in our understanding of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of fecal incontinence (FI) and to identify topics for future clinical research. This article is the first of a two-part summary of those proceedings. FI is a common symptom, with a prevalence that ranges from 7 to 15% in community-dwelling men and women, but is often underreported as providers seldom screen for FI and patients do not volunteer the symptom, even though the symptoms can have a devastating impact on quality of life. Rough estimates suggest that FI is associated with a substantial economic burden, particularly in patients who require surgical therapy. Bowel disturbances, particularly diarrhea, the symptom of rectal urgency, and burden of chronic illness are the strongest independent risk factors for FI in the community. Smoking, obesity, and inappropriate cholecystectomy are emerging, potentially modifiable risk factors. Other risk factors for FI include advanced age, female gender, disease burden (co-morbidity count, diabetes), anal sphincter trauma (obstetrical injury, prior surgery), and decreased physical activity. Neurological disorders, inflammatory bowel disease, pelvic floor anatomical disturbances (rectal prolapse) are also associated with FI. The pathophysiological mechanisms responsible for FI include diarrhea, anal and pelvic floor weakness, reduced rectal compliance, and reduced or increased rectal sensation; many patients have multi-faceted anorectal dysfunctions. The type (urge, passive or combined); etiology (anorectal disturbance, bowel symptoms or both); and severity of FI provide the basis for classifying FI; these domains can be integrated to comprehensively characterize the symptom. Several validated scales for classifying symptom severity and its impact on quality of life are available. Symptom severity scales should incorporate the frequency, volume, consistency, and nature (urge or passive) of stool leakage. Despite the basic understanding of FI, there are still major knowledge gaps in disease epidemiology and pathogenesis, necessitating future clinical research in FI