Anti-muscarinic drugs increase rectal compliance and exacerbate constipation in chronic spinal cord injury : Anti-muscarinic drug effect on neurogenic bowel.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study OBJECTIVES: We hypothesized that anti-muscarinic agents alter rectal compliance in SCI patients and that altered rectal compliance relates to bowel symptomatology. Our primary aim was to compare rectal compliance before and after the institution of anti-muscarinics (solifenacin and tolterodine) and an adrenoceptor agonist (mirabegron) in these patients. Additionally, we wanted to evaluate if anorectal manometry differed before and after use of anti-muscarinic agents. SETTING: Tertiary neurogastroenterology clinic, London METHODS: Thirty-five patients with supraconal spinal cord injury (SCI) underwent anal manometry, assessment of rectoanal inhibitory reflex (RAIR) and rectal compliance before and after anti-muscarinic treatment (for overactive bladder) was started (mean follow-up 12 weeks). Patients were assessed identically, pre-and post-treatment (solifenacin n = 17, tolterodine n = 10, mirabegron n = 8). Doses used were as for non-SCI patients. RESULTS: Resting, squeeze and cough pressures were unchanged after anti-muscarinic treatment. Rectal compliance was significantly raised after anti-muscarinic treatment (p = 0.001). The percent amplitude of maximal sphincter relaxation of the RAIR was decreased (p < 0.001) and excitation latency was increased (p = 0.006). There was no significant change in the duration of recovery of the RAIR. There was a significant increase of the Wexner Constipation Score (p = 0.001) but no change in the Wexner Incontinence Score. There was a significant correlation between change in rectal compliance and change in Wexner Constipation Score (p = 0.001). Thus, increasing compliance of the rectum is associated with worsening of constipation after anti-muscarinic therapy. However, there were no changes in anorectal manometry or rectal compliance in those who received mirabegron. CONCLUSION: Anti-muscarinic therapy for overactive bladder increases compliance of the neurogenic rectum and alters anorectal reflex activity, with worsening of constipation.

Altered Colorectal Compliance and Anorectal Physiology in Upper and Lower Motor Neurone Spinal Injury May Explain Bowel Symptom Pattern.

OBJECTIVES: Supraconal spinal cord injury (SCI) and lower motor neurone spinal cord injury (LMN-SCI) cause bowel dysfunction; colorectal compliance may further define its pathophysiology. The aim of this study was to investigate rectal (RC) and sigmoid (SC) compliance and anorectal physiology parameters, in these subjects. METHODS: Twenty-four SCI subjects with gut symptoms (14 RC, 10 SC) and 13 LMN-SCI subjects (9 RC, 4 SC) were compared with 20 spinal intact controls (10 RC, 10 SC). Staircase distensions were performed using a barostat. Anorectal manometry, including rectoanal inhibitory reflex (RAIR) measurement, was performed in all. Data presented as mean±standard error (SCI/LMN-SCI vs. controls). RESULTS: SCI subjects had a higher RC (17.0±1.9 vs. 10.7±0.5 ml/mm Hg, P<0.05) and SC (8.5±0.6 vs. 5.2±0.5 ml/mm Hg, P=0.002). LMN-SCI subjects had a lower RC (7.3±0.7 ml/mm Hg, P=0.0021) while SC was unchanged (8.3±2.2 ml/mm Hg, P>0.05). Anal resting pressure was decreased in SCI (55±5 vs. 79±7 cmH2O, P=0.0102). Anal squeeze pressure was decreased in LMN-SCI (76±13 vs. 154±21 cmH2O, P=0.0158). In SCI and LMN-SCI, the amplitude reduction of the RAIR was greater (62±4% and 70±6% vs. 44±3%, P=0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal compliance abnormalities may explain gut symptoms: increased RC and SC contributing to constipation in SCI, reduced rectal compliance contributing to fecal incontinence (FI) in LMN-SCI. Reduced resting anal pressure in SCI and reduced anal squeeze pressure in LMN-SCI along with a greater RAIR amplitude reduction may be factors in FI. These co-existing abnormalities may explain symptom overlap, and represent future therapeutic targets to ameliorate neurogenic bowel dysfunction.

Current use of antibiotic prophylaxis in breast surgery: a nationwide survey.

There is currently no consensus regarding the use of antibiotic prophylaxis in breast surgery. This postal survey aimed to establish the current practice in perioperative antibiotic use for breast surgery in the United Kingdom. Questionnaires were sent to 406 breast surgeons, enquiring about antibiotic use for common breast procedures. A total of 266 completed questionnaires were returned (65.5%). Over 80% of surgeons who performed breast augmentations, myocutaneous flap reconstructions and implant reconstructions used antibiotic prophylaxis. Up to 33% used antibiotic prophylaxis for wide local excisions (WLEs), mastectomies and axillary surgery for breast cancer, while 62% and 45% used antibiotics for breast reductions and duct excisions, respectively. The most common antibiotic used was co-amoxiclav. The variation in practice regarding antibiotic prophylaxis in breast surgery reflects the lack of reliable evidence for its efficacy. Further randomised controlled trials are required, taking into consideration specific risk factors affecting postoperative infection rate for breast surgery.