Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2017
Faecal incontinence in patients with a sphincter defect: comparison of sphincteroplasty and sacral nerve stimulation.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rodrigues F G, Chadi S A, Cracco A J, Sands D R, Zutshi M, Gurland B, Da Silva G, Wexner S D
Аннотация
AIM: Sphincteroplasty (SP) is used to treat faecal incontinence (FI) in patients with a sphincter defect. Although sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) is used in patients, its outcome in patients with a sphincter defect has not been definitively evaluated. We compared the results of SP and SNS for FI associated with a sphincter defect.
METHOD: Patients treated by SNS or SP for FI with an associated sphincter defect were retrospectively identified from an Institutional Review Board approved prospective database. Patients with ultrasound evidence of a sphincter defect were matched by age, gender and body mass index. The main outcome measure was change in the Cleveland Clinic Florida Faecal Incontinence Score (CCF-FIS).
RESULTS: Twenty-six female patients with a sphincter defect were included in the study. The 13 patients in each group were similar for age, body mass index, initial CCF-FIS and the duration of follow-up. No differences were observed in parity (P = 1.00), the rate of concomitant urinary incontinence (P = 0.62) or early postoperative complications. Within-group analysis showed a significant reduction of the CCF-FIS among patients having SNS (15.9-8.4; P = 0.003) but not SP (16.9-12.9; P = 0.078). There was a trend towards a more significant improvement in CCF-FIS in the SNS than in the SP group (post-treatment CCF-FIS 8.4 vs 12.9, P = 0.06). Net improvement in CCF-FIS was not significantly different between the groups (P = 0.06).
CONCLUSION: Significant improvement in CCF-FIS was observed in patients treated with SNS but not SP patients. A trend towards better results was seen with SNS.
METHOD: Patients treated by SNS or SP for FI with an associated sphincter defect were retrospectively identified from an Institutional Review Board approved prospective database. Patients with ultrasound evidence of a sphincter defect were matched by age, gender and body mass index. The main outcome measure was change in the Cleveland Clinic Florida Faecal Incontinence Score (CCF-FIS).
RESULTS: Twenty-six female patients with a sphincter defect were included in the study. The 13 patients in each group were similar for age, body mass index, initial CCF-FIS and the duration of follow-up. No differences were observed in parity (P = 1.00), the rate of concomitant urinary incontinence (P = 0.62) or early postoperative complications. Within-group analysis showed a significant reduction of the CCF-FIS among patients having SNS (15.9-8.4; P = 0.003) but not SP (16.9-12.9; P = 0.078). There was a trend towards a more significant improvement in CCF-FIS in the SNS than in the SP group (post-treatment CCF-FIS 8.4 vs 12.9, P = 0.06). Net improvement in CCF-FIS was not significantly different between the groups (P = 0.06).
CONCLUSION: Significant improvement in CCF-FIS was observed in patients treated with SNS but not SP patients. A trend towards better results was seen with SNS.