Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2007
Pilot study of two new injectable bulking agents for the treatment of faecal incontinence.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Maeda Y, Vaizey C J, Kamm M A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The use of injectable bulking agents for passive faecal incontinence appears to provide reasonable short-term results. However experience with different agents is limited. We report on the outcome of injections with new bulking agents.
METHOD: Each patient received injections of either Bulkamid (hydrogel cross-linked with polyacrylamide) or Permacol (porcine dermal collagen). Assessment included clinical evaluation, anorectal physiological testing, endoanal ultrasonography and questionnaires including the St Mark's Incontinence Score, one week bowel diary card, the Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) health survey. Follow up was at 6 weeks and 6 months, with a further telephone review at a median of 19 months (range 14-22).
RESULTS: Ten patients (nine female), median age 68 years (range 45-79), were enrolled. St Mark's incontinence score (0 = best, 24 = worst) was 15 (range 11-24) at baseline, 12.5 (range 3-18) at 6 weeks and 14 (range 6-22) at 6 months. A 1-week bowel diary and SF-36 forms also showed temporary improvement but this was not sustained beyond 6 weeks.
CONCLUSION: Bulkamid and Permacol injections did not have a major effect on faecal incontinence.
METHOD: Each patient received injections of either Bulkamid (hydrogel cross-linked with polyacrylamide) or Permacol (porcine dermal collagen). Assessment included clinical evaluation, anorectal physiological testing, endoanal ultrasonography and questionnaires including the St Mark's Incontinence Score, one week bowel diary card, the Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) health survey. Follow up was at 6 weeks and 6 months, with a further telephone review at a median of 19 months (range 14-22).
RESULTS: Ten patients (nine female), median age 68 years (range 45-79), were enrolled. St Mark's incontinence score (0 = best, 24 = worst) was 15 (range 11-24) at baseline, 12.5 (range 3-18) at 6 weeks and 14 (range 6-22) at 6 months. A 1-week bowel diary and SF-36 forms also showed temporary improvement but this was not sustained beyond 6 weeks.
CONCLUSION: Bulkamid and Permacol injections did not have a major effect on faecal incontinence.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Acrylic ResinsAdministration, RectalAgedBiocompatible MaterialsCollagenFecal IncontinenceFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansHydrogelsInjectionsMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProbabilityProspective StudiesQuality of LifeRecovery of FunctionRisk AssessmentSingle-Blind MethodStatistics, NonparametricTime FactorsTreatment Outcome