Prospective switch study comparing two irrigation systems for transanal irrigation in children.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Transanal irrigation (TAI) is used in children to treat constipation and incontinence. Belgium has 2 systems available: Colotip® (cheaper, however not designed for TAI) or Peristeen®.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

This patient-control switch study is the first to compare 2 TAI systems. Children regularly using Colotip® for TAI were asked to participate, after consent, a visual analogue scale (VAS) rating the system and a 2-week diary (fecal continence, self-reliance, time spent on the toilet, pain, Bristol stool scale, irrigation volume and frequency of enema) were completed. Non-parametric statistics were used.

RESULTS

Out of 26 children using Colotip®, 18 (69%) children participated and 5 refused (fear n=1, satisfaction Colotip® system n=7). Of these 18 children (interquartile range: 3-18 years, median 12.5 years, 9 girls) 5 patients stopped Peristeen® (pain n=1, fear n=1 and balloon loss n=3) and 2 were lost from follow up. Dropouts and included patients showed no statistical difference. In the 11 remaining patients, pseudo-continence (p 0.015), independence (p 0.01) and VAS score (p 0.007) were significantly better with Peristeen®, no difference was found in time spent on the toilet (p 0.288) and presence of pain (p 0.785).

CONCLUSIONS

In children Peristeen® offered significantly higher pseudo-continence and independency. 30% refused participation because of satisfaction with the Colotip® and 30% spina bifida patients reported rectal balloon loss due to sphincter hypotony. To diminish Peristeen® failure, a test-catheter could be of value. Considering Colotip® satisfaction, both systems should be available. Patient selection for Peristeen® needs further research.