Sacral nerve modulation for faecal incontinence: influence of age on outcomes and complications. A multicentre study.

AIM: Faecal incontinence is frequent in the elderly. Little is currently known about the efficacy of sacral nerve modulation (SNM) in the elderly. The present study aimed to assess the impact of age on the outcome of SNM and on the surgical revision and explantation rates by comparing the results of a large data set of patients. METHOD: Prospectively collected data from patients who underwent an implant procedure between January 2010 and December 2015 in seven French centres were retrospectively evaluated. In total, 352 patients [321 women; median age (range): 63 (24-86) years] were included. Clinically favourable and unfavourable outcomes, and surgical revision and explantation rates, were compared according to the age of the patients. RESULTS: A similar outcome was observed when comparing patients < 70 years and ≥ 70 years (a favourable outcome in 79.2% and 76.2%, respectively, P = 0.89). The probability of a successful treatment as a function of time was similar for the two age groups (< 70 years and ≥ 70 years, P = 0.54). The explantation and revision rates were not influenced by age (explantation rate: 17% in patients < 70 years vs 14% in patients ≥ 70 years, P = 0.89; and revision rate: 42% in patients < 70 years vs 40% in patients ≥ 70 years, P = 0.89). The probability of explantation as a function of time was similar for the two age groups (P = 0.82). The limitations of this study were its retrospective status, the rate of loss at follow-up and different durations of patient follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that patients ≥ 70 years suffering from faecal incontinence benefit from SNM with a similar risk as a younger population.

Transcutaneous electrical tibial nerve stimulation in the treatment of fecal incontinence: a randomized trial (CONSORT 1a).

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to show that although transcutaneous electrical tibial nerve stimulation (TENS) is being increasingly used to treat fecal incontinence (FI), its efficacy has never been proved using controlled trials. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial, 144 patients aged 30-82 years from nine centers were randomly assigned to receive either active or sham stimulations for 3 months. The primary end point was the response to treatment based on the number of incontinence and urgency episodes. Secondary end points were severity scores, quality of life scores, delay to postpone defecation, patient self-assessment of treatment efficacy, physician assessment of TENS efficacy, anorectal manometry, and adverse events. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was seen between active and sham TENS in terms of an improvement in the median number of FI/urgency episodes per week. Thirty-four patients (47%) who received the active TENS treatment exhibited a >30% decrease in the FI severity score compared with 19 patients (27%) who received the sham treatment (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.1-5.1, P=0.02). No differences in delay to postpone defecation, patient self-assessment of treatment efficacy, or anorectal manometry were seen between the two groups. The evaluating physicians rated the active stimulations as more effective than the sham stimulations (P=0.01). One minor therapy-related adverse event was observed (1.5%) (see Supplementary Consort 1b). CONCLUSIONS: We failed to demonstrate any benefit of TENS on our primary end-point.