Diverticular disease, diverticulitis and the impact on continence.

Diverticulosis and the subsequent progression to diverticular disease and diverticulitis is becoming more prevalent in western countries. The cause for this progression is not known. Diverticulitis is a significant health burden - both financially to healthcare systems, and to the patients it affects in terms of morbidity. There is a dearth of research pertaining to diverticulitis and its impact on continence. This article examines the parallels between irritable bowel syndrome and diverticular disease, which have many symptom similarities, the overlap between the conditions, and the impact on continence. Current studies regarding the role of fibre in managing diverticular disease are also discussed.

Randomized Pilot Study: Anal Inserts Versus Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Fecal Incontinence.

BACKGROUND: Anal inserts and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation may be offered to those with fecal incontinence in whom other conservative treatments have failed. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare anal inserts and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation. DESIGN: This was an investigator-blinded randomized pilot study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a large tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: Adult patients with passive or mixed fecal incontinence were recruited. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either the anal inserts or weekly percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for a period of 3 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was a 50% reduction of episodes of fecal incontinence per week as calculated by a prospectively completed 2-week bowel diary. Secondary end points were St Mark's incontinence score, International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Bowel scores (for bowel pattern, bowel control, and quality of life), use of antidiarrheal agents, estimates of comfort and acceptability. RESULTS: Fifty patients were recruited: 25 were randomly assigned to anal inserts and 25 were randomly assigned to percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation. All completed treatment. A significant improvement of scores in the 2-week bowel diary, the St Mark's scores and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Bowel scores, was seen in both groups after 3 months of treatment. A reduction of ≥50% fecal incontinence episodes was reached by 76% (n = 19/25) by the anal insert group, compared with 48% (n = 12/25) of those in the percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation group (p = 0.04). The St Mark's fecal incontinence scores and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Bowel scores for bowel pattern, bowel control, and quality of life (p = 0.01) suggest similar improvement for each group. LIMITATIONS: A realistic sample size calculation could not be performed because of the paucity of objective prospective studies assessing the effect of the insert device and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: Both anal insert and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation improved the symptoms of fecal incontinence after 3 months of treatment. The insert device appeared to be more effective than percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation. Larger studies are needed to investigate this further. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B460. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov No. NCT04273009. ESTUDIO PILOTO ALEATORIZADO DE INSERCIONES ANALES CONTRA LA ESTIMULACIN PERCUTNEA DEL NERVIO TIBIAL EN PACIENTES CON INCONTINENCIA FECAL: ANTECEDENTES:Las inserciones anales y la estimulación percutánea del nervio tibial (PTNS) se pueden ofrecer a las personas con incontinencia fecal que han fallado en otros tratamientos conservadores.OBJETIVO:Nuestro objetivo fue comparar inserciones anales y estimulación percutánea del nervio tibial.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio piloto aleatorio ciego para investigadores.AJUSTE:El estudio se realizó en un hospital de atención terciaria.PACIENTES:Se reclutaron pacientes adultos con incontinencia fecal pasiva o mixta.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron asignados al azar para recibir inserciones anales o estimulación del nervio tibial percutáneo semanal durante un período de tres meses.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El principal resultado fue una reducción del 50% de los episodios de incontinencia fecal por semana, según lo calculado mediante un diario intestinal de dos semanas completado de forma prospectiva. Los criterios de valoración secundarios fueron la puntuación de incontinencia de St Mark, las puntuaciones del ICIQ-B (para patrón intestinal, control intestinal y calidad de vida), uso de agentes antidiarreicos, estimaciones de comodidad y aceptabilidad.RESULTADOS:Se reclutaron 50 pacientes: 25 fueron asignados al azar a inserciones anales y 25 a PTNS. Todo el tratamiento completado. Se observó una mejora significativa de las puntuaciones en el diario intestinal de dos semanas, la puntuación de St Mark y la puntuación del ICIQ-B en ambos grupos después de 3 meses de tratamiento. Se alcanzó una reducción de ≥ 50% de los episodios de incontinencia fecal en un 76% (n = 19/25) en el grupo de inserción anal, en comparación con el 48% (n = 12/25) de los del grupo de estimulación percutánea del nervio tibial (p = 0,04). Las puntuaciones de incontinencia fecal de St Mark, las puntuaciones del ICIQ-B para el patrón intestinal, el control intestinal y la calidad de vida (p = 0,01) sugieren una mejora similar para cada grupo.LIMITACIONES:No se pudo realizar un cálculo realista del tamaño de la muestra debido a la escasez de estudios prospectivos objetivos que evaluaran el efecto del dispositivo de inserción y la estimulación percutánea del nervio tibial.CONCLUSIONES:Tanto la inserción anal como la estimulación percutánea del nervio tibial mejoraron los síntomas de incontinencia fecal después de 3 meses de tratamiento. El dispositivo de inserción parecia ser más efectivo que la estimulación percutánea del nervio tibial. Se necesitan estudios más amplios para investigar esto más a fondo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B460.NÚMERO DE REGISTRO DE PRUEBA:Clinicaltrials.gov No. NCT04273009.

A national dosimetric audit of IMRT.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A dosimetric audit of IMRT has been carried out within the UK between June 2009 and March 2010 in order to provide an independent check of safe implementation and to identify problems in the modelling and delivery of IMRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A mail based audit involving film and alanine dosimeters was utilized. Measurements were made for each individual field in an IMRT plan isocentrically in a flat water-equivalent phantom at a depth of 5cm. The films and alanine dosimeters were processed and analysed centrally; additional ion chamber measurements were made by each participating centre. RESULTS: 57 of 62 centres participated, with a total of 78 plans submitted. For the film measurements, all 176 fields from the less complex IMRT plans (including prostate and breast plans) achieved over 95% pixels passing a gamma criterion of 3%/3mm within the 20% isodose. For the more complex IMRT plans (mainly head and neck) 8/245 fields (3.3%) achieved less than 95% pixels passing a 4%/4mm gamma criterion. Of the alanine measurements, 4/78 (5.1%) of the measurements differed by >5% from the dose predicted by the treatment planning system. Three of these were large deviations of -77.1%, -29.1% and 14.1% respectively. Excluding the three measurements outside 10%, the mean difference was 0.05% with a standard deviation of 1.5%. The out of tolerance results have been subjected to further investigations. CONCLUSIONS: A dosimetric audit has been successfully carried out of IMRT implementation by over 90% of UK radiotherapy departments. The audit shows that modelling and delivery of IMRT is accurate, suggesting that the implementation of IMRT has been carried out safely.