Predictive Factors for Successful Sacral Nerve Stimulation in the Treatment of Fecal Incontinence: Lessons From a Comprehensive Treatment Assessment

BACKGROUND:Sacral nerve stimulation has a place in the treatment algorithm for fecal incontinence, but the predictive factors of its midterm and long-term success are unknown. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a 3-year sacral nerve stimulation treatment of fecal co...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diseases of the colon & rectum 2014-06, Vol.57 (6), p.772-780
Hauptverfasser: Roy, Anne-Laure, Gourcerol, Guillaume, Menard, Jean-Francois, Michot, Francis, Leroi, Anne-Marie, Bridoux, Valérie
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BACKGROUND:Sacral nerve stimulation has a place in the treatment algorithm for fecal incontinence, but the predictive factors of its midterm and long-term success are unknown. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of a 3-year sacral nerve stimulation treatment of fecal continence and to identify specific predictive factors from the pretreatment and per-treatment assessments for the midterm success of sacral nerve stimulation. DESIGN:A cohort analysis of consecutive patients treated with sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence over a period of 3 years was performed. SETTINGS:This study was conducted at an academic colorectal unit in a tertiary care center. PATIENTS:Sixty patients were available for the assessment of 3-year outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Clinical outcome (including Cleveland Clinic score) and anorectal physiological data were collected prospectively before and after treatment. RESULTS:At the 3-year follow-up, 33 of the 60 implanted patients had an improved outcome as defined by a ≥30% improvement in the Cleveland Clinic score from baseline (37.1% on intention to treat and 55.0% per protocol), whereas 22 had an unsuccessful outcome as defined by a
ISSN:0012-3706
1530-0358
DOI:10.1097/DCR.0000000000000115