RESUMO
Background/Aims: Sixty-eight percent of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients suffer from neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD). Transanal irrigation (TAI) is part of the therapeutic strategy. This retrospective study aims to assess the efficacy of TAI in MS population. Methods: Twenty-eight MS patients who underwent TAI after a learning period were included. We collected several demographic data: MS disease characteristics, treatments, urinary and bowel dysfunction characteristics, urodynamic parameters, results of the NBD score, the Urinary Symptom Profile (USP) score, and the Patient Global Impression of Severity score, completed by patients before the learning and during the follow-up consultation. We defined 4 specific groups depending on the NBD score severity: very minor, minor, moderate, and severe. Results: Mean follow-up was 124 days, 85.0% were initially constipated and 36% had fecal incontinence. After TAI, improvement of NBD score was higher in initial Moderate NBD score group with 75.0% of patients decreasing their NBD score into lower severity categories. Few modifications were observed for baseline Very minor and Severe NBD score groups with 60.0% and 87.5% of patients staying in the same category. Statistical improvement of USP voiding dysfunction score was observed (95% CI, -6.13--1.19; P = 0.005) without improvement of overactive bladder USP sub-score. Conclusions: TAI is effective in NBD, especially in MS patients with initial Moderate NBD score. Improvement of voiding dysfunction following TAI confirms the pelvic organ cross-talk and the need to systematically consider and treat bowel dysfunction in MS to also improve urinary symptoms.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pelvic floor fatigue is known by its clinical consequences (fecal incontinence, stress urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse), but there are still few studies on the subject. OBJECTIVE: This article presents an overview of the current knowledge of pelvic and perineal fatigue, focusing on its assessment and consequences in terms of evaluation and therapeutic strategies, to propose an evaluation that could be routinely performed. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature in MEDLINE via PubMed and Cochrane Library databases by using the keywords pelvic floor, muscular fatigue, physiopathology, stress urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, fecal incontinence, physical activity, and pelvic rehabilitation. We included reports of systematic reviews and retrospective and prospective studies on adult humans and animals in English or French published up to April 2018 with no restriction on start date. RESULTS: We selected 59 articles by keyword search, 18 by hand-search and 3 specific guidelines (including the 2009 International Continence Society recommendations); finally 45 articles were included; 14 are described in the Results section (2 reviews of 6 and 20 studies, and 12 prospective observational or cross-over studies of 5 to 317 patients including 1 of animals). Perineal fatigue can be assessed by direct assessment, electromyography and spectral analysis and during urodynamics. Because pelvic floor fatigue assessments are not evaluated routinely, this fatigability is not always identified and is often falsely considered an exclusive pelvic floor weakness, as suggested by some rehabilitation methods that also weaken the pelvic floor instead of enhancing it. CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor fatigue is not evaluated enough on a routine basis and the assessment is heterogeneous. A better knowledge of pelvic floor fatigue by standardized routine evaluation could lead to targeted therapeutic strategies.
