Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Techniques in Coloproctology 3/2021

01-03-2021 | Review

Insert devices for faecal incontinence

Authors: P. How, P. M. Trivedi, P. E. Bearn, G. P. Thomas

Published in: Techniques in Coloproctology | Issue 3/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Faecal incontinence (FI) affects 1–19% of the general population and carries significant physical and psychological morbidity. Treatment strategies vary greatly with respect to morbidity and efficacy and relatively little is known regarding the role of mechanical devices such as anal and vaginal inserts. This is an up-to-date systematic review of the use of these devices in the management of patients with FI.

Methods

A systematic electronic search was performed of the Medline, Pubmed and Embase databases using the key words and/or MeSH ‘anal plug’, ‘anal insert’, ‘vaginal insert’ and ‘faecal incontinence’. Only articles that reported clinical outcomes for these devices for FI in the English language were included. Review articles were excluded to avoid duplication of data.

Results

Thirteen articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Two articles reported outcomes for the Eclipse vaginal insert and 11 articles reported on three types of anal inserts; the Coloplast ‘Tulip’ design (6), the Procon/ProTect device (2) and the Renew insert (3). When tolerated, both anal and vaginal inserts significantly improved continence, bowel function and quality of life where reported. Adverse effects included discomfort, leakage and slippage. Long-term compliance and benefit are yet to be determined.

Conclusions

Vaginal and anal inserts may be a useful treatment for FI. Better quality of evidence is needed to define its effectiveness.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Damon H, Guye O et al (2006) Prevalence of anal incontinence in adults and impact on quality-of-life. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 30:37–43CrossRef Damon H, Guye O et al (2006) Prevalence of anal incontinence in adults and impact on quality-of-life. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 30:37–43CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Sharma A, Tuan L, Marshall RJ et al (2016) Systematic review of the prevalence of faecal incontinence. Br J Surg 103:1589–1597CrossRef Sharma A, Tuan L, Marshall RJ et al (2016) Systematic review of the prevalence of faecal incontinence. Br J Surg 103:1589–1597CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Nelson R, Furner S, Jesudason V (1998) Faecal incontinence in Wisconsin nursing homes: prevalence and associations. Dis Colon Rectum 41:1226–1229CrossRef Nelson R, Furner S, Jesudason V (1998) Faecal incontinence in Wisconsin nursing homes: prevalence and associations. Dis Colon Rectum 41:1226–1229CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Shamseer L, Moher D et al (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 349:g7647CrossRef Shamseer L, Moher D et al (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 349:g7647CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Mortensen N, Humphreys MS (1991) The anal continence plug: a disposable device for patients with anorectal incontinence. The Lancet 338(8762):295–297CrossRef Mortensen N, Humphreys MS (1991) The anal continence plug: a disposable device for patients with anorectal incontinence. The Lancet 338(8762):295–297CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Burcharth F, Ballan A et al (1986) The colostomy plug: a new disposable device for a continent colostomy. The Lancet 2(8515):1062–1063CrossRef Burcharth F, Ballan A et al (1986) The colostomy plug: a new disposable device for a continent colostomy. The Lancet 2(8515):1062–1063CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Christiansen J, Roed-Petersen K (1993) Clinical assessment of the anal continence plug. Dis Colon Rectum 36(8):740–742CrossRef Christiansen J, Roed-Petersen K (1993) Clinical assessment of the anal continence plug. Dis Colon Rectum 36(8):740–742CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Norton C, Kamm MA (2001) Anal plug for faecal incontinence. Colorectal Dis 3:323–327CrossRef Norton C, Kamm MA (2001) Anal plug for faecal incontinence. Colorectal Dis 3:323–327CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Van Winckel M, Van Biervliet S, Van Laecke E, Hoebeke P (2006) Is an anal plug useful in the treatment of fecal incontinence in children with spina bifida or anal atresia. J Urol 176:342–344CrossRef Van Winckel M, Van Biervliet S, Van Laecke E, Hoebeke P (2006) Is an anal plug useful in the treatment of fecal incontinence in children with spina bifida or anal atresia. J Urol 176:342–344CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Cazemier M, Felt-Bersma RJF, Mulder CJJ (2007) Anal plugs and retrograde colonic irrigation are helpful in fecal incontinence or constipation. World J Gastroenterol 14(22):3101–3105CrossRef Cazemier M, Felt-Bersma RJF, Mulder CJJ (2007) Anal plugs and retrograde colonic irrigation are helpful in fecal incontinence or constipation. World J Gastroenterol 14(22):3101–3105CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Bond C, Youngson G et al (2007) Anal plugs for the management of fecal incontinence in children and adults. A Randomized Control Trial. J Clin Gastroenterol 41(1):45–53CrossRef Bond C, Youngson G et al (2007) Anal plugs for the management of fecal incontinence in children and adults. A Randomized Control Trial. J Clin Gastroenterol 41(1):45–53CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Lukacz E, Segall M, Wexner S (2015) Evaluation of an anal insert device for the conservative management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 58:892–898CrossRef Lukacz E, Segall M, Wexner S (2015) Evaluation of an anal insert device for the conservative management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 58:892–898CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Segal JP, Leo CA et al (2018) Acceptability, effectiveness and safety of a renew anal insert in patients who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Colorectal Dis 21:73–78CrossRef Segal JP, Leo CA et al (2018) Acceptability, effectiveness and safety of a renew anal insert in patients who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Colorectal Dis 21:73–78CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Leo CA, Thomas GP et al (2019) The Renew anal insert for passive faecal incontinence: a retrospective audit of our use of a novel device. Colorectal Dis 21:684–688CrossRef Leo CA, Thomas GP et al (2019) The Renew anal insert for passive faecal incontinence: a retrospective audit of our use of a novel device. Colorectal Dis 21:684–688CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Giamundo P, Welber A et al (2002) The Procon incontinence device: a new nonsurgical approach to preventing episodes of fecal incontinence. Am J Gastroenetrol 97(9):2328–2332CrossRef Giamundo P, Welber A et al (2002) The Procon incontinence device: a new nonsurgical approach to preventing episodes of fecal incontinence. Am J Gastroenetrol 97(9):2328–2332CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Giamundo P, Altomare DF et al (2007) The ProTect device in the treatment of severe fecal incontinence: preliminary results of a multicentre trial. Tech Coloproctol 11(4):310–314CrossRef Giamundo P, Altomare DF et al (2007) The ProTect device in the treatment of severe fecal incontinence: preliminary results of a multicentre trial. Tech Coloproctol 11(4):310–314CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Richter H, Matthews C et al (2015) A vaginal bowel-control system for the treatment of fecal incontinence. Obstet Gynaecol 125(3):540–547CrossRef Richter H, Matthews C et al (2015) A vaginal bowel-control system for the treatment of fecal incontinence. Obstet Gynaecol 125(3):540–547CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Varma M, Matthews C et al (2016) Impact of a Novel Vaginal Bowel Control System on Bowel Function. Dis Colon Rectum 59:127–131CrossRef Varma M, Matthews C et al (2016) Impact of a Novel Vaginal Bowel Control System on Bowel Function. Dis Colon Rectum 59:127–131CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Maeda et al (2014) Outcome of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence at 5 years. Ann Surg 259(6):1126–1131CrossRef Maeda et al (2014) Outcome of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence at 5 years. Ann Surg 259(6):1126–1131CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Luo et al (2010) Systematic review on the efficacy and safety of injectable bulking agents for passive faecal incontinence. Colorectal Dis 12:296–303CrossRef Luo et al (2010) Systematic review on the efficacy and safety of injectable bulking agents for passive faecal incontinence. Colorectal Dis 12:296–303CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Leo CA, Maeda Y et al (2017) Current practice of continence advisors in managing faecal incontinence in the United Kingdom: results of an online survey. Colorectal Dis 19(9):O339–O344CrossRef Leo CA, Maeda Y et al (2017) Current practice of continence advisors in managing faecal incontinence in the United Kingdom: results of an online survey. Colorectal Dis 19(9):O339–O344CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Insert devices for faecal incontinence
Authors
P. How
P. M. Trivedi
P. E. Bearn
G. P. Thomas
Publication date
01-03-2021
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Techniques in Coloproctology / Issue 3/2021
Print ISSN: 1123-6337
Electronic ISSN: 1128-045X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02317-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2021

Techniques in Coloproctology 3/2021 Go to the issue