Long-term outcomes of sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence.

BACKGROUND: Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) has proven short- to medium-term effectiveness for the treatment of faecal incontinence (FI); fewer long-term outcomes have been presented and usually in small series. Here, the long-term effectiveness of SNS was evaluated in a large European cohort of patients with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up. METHODS: Prospectively registered data from patients with FI who had received SNS for at least 5 years from ten European centres were collated by survey. Daily stool diaries, and Cleveland Clinic and St Mark's incontinence scores were evaluated at baseline, after implantation and at the last follow-up. SNS was considered successful when at least 50 per cent symptom improvement was maintained at last follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 407 patients underwent temporary stimulation, of whom 272 (66·8 per cent) had an impulse generator implanted; 228 (56·0 per cent) were available for long-term follow-up at a median of 84 (i.q.r. 70-113) months. Significant reductions in the number of FI episodes per week (from median 7 to 0·25) and summative symptom scores (median Cleveland Clinic score from 16 to 7, St Mark's score from 19 to 6) were recorded after implantation (all P < 0·001) and maintained in long-term follow-up. In per-protocol analysis, long-term success was maintained in 71·3 per cent of patients and full continence was achieved in 50·0 per cent; respective values based on intention-to-treat analysis were 47·7 and 33·4 per cent. Predictive analyses determined no significant association between pretreatment variables and successful outcomes. Risk of long-term failure correlated with minor symptom score improvement during the temporary test phase. CONCLUSION: SNS remains an effective treatment for FI in the long term for approximately half of the patients starting therapy.

Value of sacral nerve stimulation in the treatment of severe faecal incontinence: a comparison to the artificial bowel sphincter.

OBJECTIVE: Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) is a recent treatment option in the management of severe faecal incontinence (FI) that offers promising results. The aim of this study was to compare SNS to artificial bowel sphincter (ABS) implanted patients to assess the rationale of this approach in achieving satisfying functional results and improved quality of life (QoL). METHOD: Among 27 patients tested (December 2001 and April 2004), 15 patients were successfully managed with SNS. They were compared to 15 matched patients implanted with ABS in a previous period (control group). Assessment of continence level (Cleveland Clinic score), constipation score (Knowles, Eccersley, Scott Score) and QoL (Short-Form 36) were prospectively collected. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable for clinical parameters (age, gender, anal testing and aetiology of incontinence) and anal physiology. The mean postoperative continence score was significantly higher in the SNS group [9.4 (+/-3.3) vs 5.7 (+/-3.9), P < 0.01]; however, the mean constipation score was higher in the ABS group (6.3 +/- 6.3 vs 12.8 +/- 5.7, P < 0.01). The mean QoL score was similar in both groups. The mean follow-up after implantation was 15 (+/-9) months in the SNS group, and 43 (+/-33) months in the ABS group. CONCLUSION: In this study, SNS offers satisfying results in terms of QoL, similar to that of ABS. Although it seems to be less effective in restoring continence level, symptoms of outlet obstruction are more frequent after ABS. This SNS approach should be proposed as a first-line treatment of FI in selected patients. ABS should remain an option that can improve function.

Optimizing electrode implantation in sacral nerve stimulation--an anatomical cadaver study controlled by a laparoscopic camera.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Sacral nerve stimulation is the therapy of choice in patients with neurogenic faecal and urine incontinence, constipation and some pelvic pain syndromes. The aim of this study is to determine the best insertion angles of the electrode under laparoscopic visualization of the sacral nerves. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five fresh cadaver pelvises were dissected through an anterior approach of the presacral space, exposing the ventral sacral roots. Needles and electrodes were inserted into the S3 foramen. Both right and left sides were used, with the traditional percutaneous procedure. The validation was done by a laparoscopic camera controlling the position of the needle and electrode on the nerve. The angles were assessed with a goniometer and were confirmed in two living patients. RESULTS: The mean angle of insertion in the sagittal plane was 62.9+/-3 degrees (range, 59-70). In the axial plane, the mean angle for the left side was 91.7+/-13.5 degrees (range, 80-110) and 83.2+/-7.7 degrees for the right side (range, 75-95). These angles resulted in the optimal placement of the leads along the S3 sacral root, in all these cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study allows direct visualization during the placement of the needle and electrode, thus permitting accurate calculations of the best angle of approach during the surgical procedure in sacral nerve stimulation. These objective findings attempt to standardize this technique, which is often performed with the aid of intra-operative fluoroscopy but still leaving a lot to chance. These insertion angles should help to find more consistent and reproducible results and thus improved outcome in patients.