Systematic review of perianal implants in the treatment of faecal incontinence.

BACKGROUND: Injectable bulking agents have been used with varying success for the treatment of faecal incontinence. This systematic review aimed to investigate the various injectable agents and techniques used for the treatment of faecal incontinence, and to assess their safety and efficacy. METHODS: Thirty-nine publications were identified and studied. The following variables were pooled for univariable analysis: type, location, route of bulking agents, and the use of ultrasound guidance, antibiotics, laxatives and anaesthetics. Predictors of the development of complications and successful outcomes were identified by multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1070 patients were included in the analysis. On multivariable analysis, the only significant predictor of the development of complications was the route of injection of bulking agents (odds ratio 3·40, 95 per cent confidence interval 1·62 to 7·12; P = 0·001). Two variables were significant predictors of a successful short-term outcome: the use of either PTQ(®) (OR 5·93, 2·21 to 16·12; P = 0·001) or Coaptite(®) (OR 10·74, 1·73 to 65·31; P = 0·001) was associated with a greater likelihood of success. Conversely, the use of local anaesthetic was associated with a lower likelihood of success (OR 0·18, 0·05 to 0·59; P = 0·005). Failure to use laxatives in the postoperative period resulted in a poorer medium- to longer-term outcome (OR 0·13, 0·06 to 0·25; P = 0·001). CONCLUSION: This systematic review has identified variations in the practice of injection of bulking agents that appear to influence the likelihood of complications and affect the outcomes after treatment.

A classification system for faecal incontinence based on anorectal investigations.

BACKGROUND: Faecal incontinence is a socially disabling condition that affects a heterogeneous population of patients. There is no standardization of investigations, and treatment outcomes are variable. The major limitation for comparing the results from different studies is the lack of a pretreatment classification of incontinence. The aim of this study was to review the anorectal investigation findings and propose a simple, repeatable classification for faecal incontinence. METHODS: Patients who had anorectal investigations for defaecatory disorders from February 2000 to September 2006 were analysed retrospectively. All patients had anorectal manometry, anal mucosal electrosensitivity testing and endoanal ultrasonography. RESULTS: Of a total of 1294 patients, 135 were excluded, leaving 1159 (460 continent and 699 incontinent) for analysis. The patients were divided into four groups: traumatic incontinence, neuropathic faecal incontinence, combined faecal incontinence and idiopathic faecal incontinence. The manometric variables and demographics were distinct in these groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with faecal incontinence can be classified into different groups with distinct pathophysiological variables. Such a classification system will enable comparison and interpretation of the outcomes of different studies and also help in the selection of patients for appropriate treatments.

Intra-anal collagen injection for the treatment of faecal incontinence.

BACKGROUND: Intra-anal injectable agents have been used to treat faecal incontinence. The aim of this study was to report the experience of a cohort of patients who underwent intra-anal injection of collagen and to determine which patients benefited from the technique. METHODS: Data, including age, sex, incontinence score, classification of incontinence, baseline resting pressure and vector volume, were collected prospectively for 73 consecutive patients (59 women) undergoing intra-anal collagen injection. Patients were reviewed after treatment and incontinence scores documented. A proportion of patients also underwent repeat anorectal physiological testing 8 weeks after the procedure. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 12 months after the intra-anal injection, 63 per cent of patients had an improved incontinence score and 73 per cent reported an overall improvement in symptoms. Logistic regression showed that older age and idiopathic faecal incontinence were predictors of a successful outcome (P = 0.042 and P = 0.048 respectively). CONCLUSION: Intra-anal collagen injection appears to have a role in the treatment of faecal incontinence. The majority of patients can expect both objective and subjective improvement. The best results are achieved in older patients and in those with idiopathic incontinence.

Does the need to self-digitate or the presence of a large or nonemptying rectocoele on proctography influence the outcome of transanal rectocoele repair?

INTRODUCTION: Transanal repair of anterior rectocoele is a well described technique with variable success rate. In our department we offer repair to patients who fit the following criteria; the need to self digitate (transvaginal or perineal); a large rectocoele; a nonemptying rectocoele. Using these selection criteria previous authors have shown excellent results. The aim of our study was to review our results using this selective approach and also to determine whether the need to self digitate, the presence of a large rectocoele and the degree of emptying could predict which patients would achieve a successful result. METHODS: Fifty-five patients underwent repair over a three-year period. The main presenting symptom was noted for each patient and also whether self-digitation was required in order to achieve successful evacuation. Dynamic evacuation proctography was performed on all patients. Size of rectocoele, percentage of paste expelled and other proctographic abnormalities were noted for each patient. Follow up was at 6 weeks and 6 months at which point patients were asked whether their symptoms had resolved, improved, remained the same or had worsened. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 48 of the patients (median age 52 years, IQR 43-63). The presenting complaint was constipation in 22 patients, obstructive defaecation in 15, incomplete evacuation in 5, postdefaecation soiling in 4 and dyspareunia in 2. Thirty-eight patients noted the need to self-digitate, 10 did not. Proctography revealed a large rectocoele (> 4 cm) in 22 patients and a medium or small rectocoele (< 4 cm) in 26 patients. There was a rectocoele alone in 34 patients, in combination with perineal descent in 11 and with intussusception in 3. Median percentage of paste expelled was 70% (range 20-95). At 6 weeks postoperatively, 43 patients had complete resolution of their symptoms whilst 5 reported only some or no improvement. At 6 months, 37 patients sustained complete resolution of their symptoms and 11 did not. Pre-operative factors were compared for these two groups of patients. There was no difference in age (P > 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test) between the two groups There was also no difference in size of rectocoele, degree of emptying, the presence of another proctographic abnormality and the need to self-digitate between the two groups (P > 0.05, Fisher's exact test). DISCUSSION: No factors were seen to distinguish between the successful and unsuccessful groups of patients following rectocoele repair, however, an overall success rate of 75% was achieved using our selection criteria. This figure is in keeping with reported success rates in the literature.

Inter-observer variability in the reporting of dynamic evacuation proctography.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the degree of inter-observer variability between two reporters of dynamic evacuation proctography (DEP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The videotapes of 136 patients who had undergone the investigation of DEP in a 1-year period were retrospectively and independently reported by two of the authors. The authors recorded the presence or absence of an anterior rectocoele (as well as size-small, medium or large), an intussusception, a rectal prolapse and any degree of non-relaxing puborectalis syndrome (NRPS). RESULTS: The results were analysed using the κ statistic. I.W.I. reported 18% of the proctograms as normal. S.G.S. reported 26% of the proctograms as normal. κ scores for agreement on the presence or absence of rectal prolapses, NRPS, intussusception and anterior rectocoeles between the two reporters were 0.79, 0.70, 0.54 and 0.82, respectively. CONCLUSION: Usefulness of an investigation is dependent upon its reproducibility and hence on the degree of inter-observer variability in its reporting. Our study shows that DEP is a useful investigation for delineating the mechanics of the pelvic floor and that consistency of reporting in our Department is good.