Physiological, psychological and behavioural characteristics of men and women with faecal incontinence.

Background The factors leading to faecal incontinence in males are less well understood than those in females. In this prospective study we aimed to compare the physiological, anatomical, psychological and behavioural characteristics of male and female patients presenting with symptoms of faecal incontinence. Method One hundred and nine patients presenting with symptoms of faecal incontinence were studied. They underwent anorectal physiological studies, endoanal ultrasonography, and completed a St Mark’s Incontinence Score, a locally developed pad questionnaire, a bowel symptom questionnaire, the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Maudsley Obsessive Compulsive Inventory. Results Thirty-four men (mean age 59 years, SD 14 years, range 33–80) and 75 women (mean age 55 years, SD 15 years, range 21–86) participated in the study. Twenty-one patients (38% of men and 11% of women) had normal manometry and endoanal ultrasonography. There was no significant difference in the resting pressures of men compared with women, but men had significantly higher squeeze pressures. Rectal capacity was significantly higher in men but anal and rectal electrosensitivities were the same. Men placed a tissue at the anus more commonly than women while women were more likely to use a pad and to carry a spare pair of underwear around with them. Psychological profiles were very similar in the two sexes. Conclusions Nearly 40% of men with faecal incontinence report it in the absence of a definable functional or structural sphincter abnormality. There are differences in physiological characteristics and coping behaviours of men and women with faecal incontinence

Does the St. Mark's incontinence score reflect patients' perceptions?:A review of 390 patients

Purpose The St. Mark’s incontinence score is widely used to evaluate the severity of fecal incontinence. It is unknown to what extent such scores relate to patients’ perceptions about their condition. The primary goal of this study was to assess this correlation. Secondary goals were to evaluate the relationship between different types of incontinence, age, gender, and the continence score and to assess the sensitivity of St. Mark’s incontinence score to a change in patients’ perception and outcome evaluation after treatment. Methods Patients’ subjective perception of bowel control (using a 0–10 scale) and St. Mark’s incontinence score for 390 patients were reviewed. Change in the score was documented for 131 patients who underwent biofeedback treatment and compared with patients’ outcome evaluation. Results There was a moderate correlation between patients’ perception of bowel control and the St. Mark’s incontinence score (r = −0.55; P < 0.001). The correlation was maintained, regardless of type of incontinence (r = −0.48 to −0.55), age (≤60 years: r = −0.54; >60 years: r = −0.58; P < 0.001) or gender (male: r = −0.48; female: r = −0.53; P < 0.001) of patients. St. Mark’s incontinence score was sensitive to a change in patients’ subjective evaluation after the treatment. Conclusions The St. Mark’s incontinence score correlates moderately well with patients’ subjective perception and is reliable regardless of the type of incontinence, patients’ age, or gender. It is suitable for the severity assessment of fecal incontinence and the evaluation of a treatment outcome

The Renew® anal insert for passive faecal incontinence: a retrospective audit of our use of a novel device

Aim The Renew® anal insert is a recent treatment for patients who suffer from passive faecal incontinence (FI). Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of the insert and patients’ satisfaction with it. Method A retrospective audit of patients who were treated with the Renew® anal insert was undertaken. The St Mark's Incontinence Score was used to evaluate clinical outcome. Renew® size, the number of inserts used per day and per week had also been recorded. Subjective assessment of symptoms, how beneficial Renew® was and how satisfied patients were with the device were all recorded. Major events and side effects were also noted. Results Thirty patients received Renew® as a treatment for passive incontinence in 2016. The median St Mark's Incontinence Score was 15 (range 7–18) at baseline and 10 (range 2–18) at first follow-up (P &lt; 0.0001) at a median of 11 (range 8–14) weeks. Eleven (37%) patients used the regular size and 19 (63%) the large size. Patients used an average of 1.67 inserts per day (range 1–3) on an average of 3.58 days per week (1–7). Three patients reported a deterioration in symptoms, seven (23%) had no change and 20 (67%) showed a significant improvement. Six patients (20%) did not like the device while 24 (80%) liked it. Seventeen patients (57%) wanted to continue this treatment in the long term. Conclusion The Renew® device seems to be an acceptable and effective therapeutic option for passive FI. Further work is needed to compare it with other treatments and establish its position in the treatment pathway

Sacral nerve stimulation for intractable constipation

OBJECTIVE: Traditional surgical procedures for intractable idiopathic constipation are associated with a variable outcome and substantial morbidity. The symptomatic response, physiological effect and effect on quality of life of sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) were evaluated in patients with constipation (slow transit and normal transit with impaired evacuation). METHODS: In a prospective study at five European sites patients who failed conservative treatment underwent 21 days test stimulation. Patients with >50% improvement in symptoms underwent permanent neurostimulator implantation. Primary end points were increased defecation frequency, decreased straining and decreased sensation of incomplete evacuation. RESULTS: 62 patients (55 female, median age 40 years) underwent test stimulation, of whom 45 (73%) proceeded to chronic stimulation. 39 (87%) of these 45 patients achieved treatment success. After a median 28 (range 1-55) months follow-up, defecation frequency increased from 2.3 to 6.6 evacuations per week (p<0.001). Days per week with evacuation increased from 2.3 to 4.8 (p<0.001). There was a decrease in time spent toileting (10.5 to 5.7 min, p=0.001), straining (75-46% of successful evacuations, p<0.001), perception of incomplete evacuation (71.5-46% of successful evacuations, p<0.001) and subjective rating of abdominal pain and bloating (p<0.001). Cleveland Clinic constipation score (0=no to 30=severe constipation) decreased from 18 to 10 (p<0.001). Visual analogue scale (VAS) score (0=severe to 100=no symptoms) increased from 8 to 66 (p<0.001). Patients with slow and normal transit benefited. Quality of life significantly improved. Colonic transit normalised in half of those with baseline slow transit (p=0.014). CONCLUSION: SNS is effective in the treatment of idiopathic slow and normal transit constipation resistant to conservative treatment. Clinical Trial Number NCT00200005

ESCP consensus on the surgical management of intestinal failure in adults

Intestinal failure (IF) is a debilitating condition of inadequate nutrition due to an anatomical and/or physiological deficit of the intestine. Surgical management of patients with acute and chronic intestinal failure requires expertise to deal with technical challenges and make correct decisions. Dedicated intestinal failure units have expertise in patient selection, operative risk assessment, and multi-disciplinary support such as nutritional input and interventional radiology, which dramatically improve the morbidity and mortality of this complex condition and can beneficially affect the continuing dependence on parenteral nutritional support. Currently there is little guidance to bridge the gap between general surgeons and specialist IF surgeons. Fifteen European experts took part in a consensus process to develop a guidance to support surgeons in the management of patients with intestinal failure. Based on a systematic literature review, statements were prepared for a modified Delphi process. The evidence for each statement was graded using Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Level of Evidence. The current article contains the statements reflecting the position and practice of leading European intestinal failure experts encompassing the general definition of intestinal failure surgery and organisation of an IF unit, strategies to prevent IF, management of acute IF, management of wound, fistula and stoma, rehabilitation, intestinal and abdominal reconstruction, criteria for referral to a specialist unit and intestinal transplantation. © 2016, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved

Guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of Faecal Incontinence-A UEG/ESCP/ESNM/ESPCG collaboration

Introduction The goal of this project was to create an up-to-date joint European clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of faecal incontinence (FI), using the best available evidence. These guidelines are intended to help guide all medical professionals treating adult patients with FI (e.g., general practitioners, surgeons, gastroenterologists, other healthcare workers) and any patients who are interested in information regarding the diagnosis and management of FI. Methods These guidelines have been created in cooperation with members from the United European Gastroenterology (UEG), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) and the European Society for Primary Care Gastroenterology (ESPCG). These members made up the guideline development group (GDG). Additionally, a patient advisory board (PAB) was created to reflect and comment on the draft guidelines from a patient perspective. Relevant review questions were established by the GDG along with a set of outcomes most important for decision making. A systematic literature search was performed using these review questions and outcomes as a framework. For each predefined review question, the study or studies with the highest level of study design were included. If evidence of a higher-level study design was available, no lower level of evidence was sought or included. Data from the studies were extracted by two reviewers for each predefined important outcome within each review question. Where possible, forest plots were created. After summarising the results for each review question, a systematic quality assessment using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) approach was performed. For each review question, we assessed the quality of evidence for every predetermined important outcome. After evidence review and quality assessment were completed, recommendations could be formulated. The wording used for each recommendation was dependent on the level of quality of evidence. Lower levels of evidence resulted in weaker recommendations and higher levels of evidence resulted in stronger recommendations. Recommendations were discussed within the GDG to reach consensus. Results These guidelines contain 45 recommendations on the classification, diagnosis and management of FI in adult patients. Conclusion These multidisciplinary European guidelines provide an up-to-date comprehensive evidence-based framework with recommendations on the diagnosis and management of adult patients who suffer from FI

Guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of Faecal Incontinence-A UEG/ESCP/ESNM/ESPCG collaboration

Introduction The goal of this project was to create an up-to-date joint European clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of faecal incontinence (FI), using the best available evidence. These guidelines are intended to help guide all medical professionals treating adult patients with FI (e.g., general practitioners, surgeons, gastroenterologists, other healthcare workers) and any patients who are interested in information regarding the diagnosis and management of FI. Methods These guidelines have been created in cooperation with members from the United European Gastroenterology (UEG), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) and the European Society for Primary Care Gastroenterology (ESPCG). These members made up the guideline development group (GDG). Additionally, a patient advisory board (PAB) was created to reflect and comment on the draft guidelines from a patient perspective. Relevant review questions were established by the GDG along with a set of outcomes most important for decision making. A systematic literature search was performed using these review questions and outcomes as a framework. For each predefined review question, the study or studies with the highest level of study design were included. If evidence of a higher-level study design was available, no lower level of evidence was sought or included. Data from the studies were extracted by two reviewers for each predefined important outcome within each review question. Where possible, forest plots were created. After summarising the results for each review question, a systematic quality assessment using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) approach was performed. For each review question, we assessed the quality of evidence for every predetermined important outcome. After evidence review and quality assessment were completed, recommendations could be formulated. The wording used for each recommendation was dependent on the level of quality of evidence. Lower levels of evidence resulted in weaker recommendations and higher levels of evidence resulted in stronger recommendations. Recommendations were discussed within the GDG to reach consensus. Results These guidelines contain 45 recommendations on the classification, diagnosis and management of FI in adult patients. Conclusion These multidisciplinary European guidelines provide an up-to-date comprehensive evidence-based framework with recommendations on the diagnosis and management of adult patients who suffer from FI