Treatment of fecal incontinence-is there a light in the end of the tunnel?
Anal band
Artificial bowel sphincter
Fecal incontinence
Minimally invasive surgery
SIMPLYFI
Sacral neuromodulation
Sphinkeeper®
Journal
Wiener klinische Wochenschrift
ISSN: 1613-7671
Titre abrégé: Wien Klin Wochenschr
Pays: Austria
ID NLM: 21620870R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 May 2024
07 May 2024
Historique:
received:
06
04
2024
accepted:
09
04
2024
medline:
7
5
2024
pubmed:
7
5
2024
entrez:
7
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Fecal incontinence (FI) is a common disease with higher incidence rates in the elderly population. Treatment of affected patients remains challenging and ranges from conservative management to surgical techniques. Despite all efforts patients often undergo several therapeutic measurements to achieve reasonable functional improvements.Although sacral neuromodulation still remains a key therapy with success rates up to 80%, a significant number of patients do not respond sufficiently and require further treatment.Several artificial bowel sphincter devices exist, which can lead to better functional control in selected patients. Notably, complications after these surgeries do occur frequently and the need for implant replacement is still considerable high.A novel anal band, developed by Agency for Medical Innovations (A.M.I., Austria) is currently under evaluation. This device, composed of silicone and polyester, is placed around the anus outside the external sphincter muscle complex aiming to improve stool continence via mechanical pressure. Early results of this new operation are eagerly awaited.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38713226
doi: 10.1007/s00508-024-02369-7
pii: 10.1007/s00508-024-02369-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Damon H, Schott AM, Barth X, Faucheron JL, Abramowitz L, Siproudhis L, et al. Clinical characteristics and quality of life in a cohort of 621 patients with faecal incontinence. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23(9):845–51.
doi: 10.1007/s00384-008-0489-x
pubmed: 18506453
Whitehead WE, Borrud L, Goode PS, Meikle S, Mueller ER, Tuteja A, et al. Fecal incontinence in US adults: epidemiology and risk factors. Gastroenterology. 2009;137(2):512–7, 7 e1–2.
Kasiri MM, Mittlboeck M, Dawoud C, Riss S. Technical and functional outcome after sacral neuromodulation using the “H” technique. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2023;135(15-16:399–405.
doi: 10.1007/s00508-022-02115-x
Dawoud C, Reissig L, Muller C, Jahl M, Harpain F, Capek B, et al. Comparison of surgical techniques for optimal lead placement in sacral neuromodulation: a cadaver study. Tech Coloproctol. 2022;26(9):707–12.
doi: 10.1007/s10151-022-02632-x
pubmed: 35633425
pmcid: 9360091
Dawoud C, Widmann KM, Pereyra D, Harpain F, Riss S. Long-term outcome after SphinKeeper(R) surgery for treating fecal incontinence-who are good candidates? Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023;408(1):456.
doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-03188-6
pubmed: 38052934
pmcid: 10698116
Dawoud C, Gidl D, Widmann KM, Pereyra D, Harpain F, Kama B, et al. Endosonographic monitoring of Sphinkeeper((R)) prostheses movements: does physical activity have an impact? Updates Surg. 2024;76(1):169–77.
doi: 10.1007/s13304-023-01636-y
pubmed: 37640968
Fattorini E, Brusa T, Gingert C, Hieber SE, Leung V, Osmani B, et al. Artificial Muscle Devices: Innovations and Prospects for Fecal Incontinence Treatment. Ann Biomed Eng. 2016;44(5):1355–69.
doi: 10.1007/s10439-016-1572-z
pubmed: 26926695
pmcid: 4837210
Goos M, Baumgartner U, Lohnert M, Thomusch O, Ruf G. Experience with a new prosthetic anal sphincter in three coloproctological centres. BMC Surg. 2013;13:45.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2482-13-45
pubmed: 24502440
pmcid: 3853926
Devesa JM, Hervas PL, Vicente R, Rey A, Die J, Moreno I, et al. Anal encirclement with a simple prosthetic sling for faecal incontinence. Tech Coloproctol. 2011;15(1):17–22.
doi: 10.1007/s10151-010-0673-1
pubmed: 21264677