Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Techniques in Coloproctology
Published in: Techniques in Coloproctology 3/2021

Open Access 01-03-2021 | Constipation | Original Article

Effects of temporary sacral nerve stimulation on gastrointestinal motility and function in patients with chronic refractory slow-transit constipation

Authors: D. F. Altomare, A. Picciariello, A. Di Ciaula, M. Rinaldi, M. De Fazio, P. Portincasa

Published in: Techniques in Coloproctology | Issue 3/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) on patients with chronic refractory slow-transit constipation is controversial and its mechanism of action on gastrointestinal motility and transit is not fully understood. The aim of this study was to document the effects of temporary SNS on the gastrointestinal and biliary tract motility and on gastrointestinal transit in patients with refractory slow-transit constipation.

Methods

This was a prospective interventional study. Patients with slow-transit chronic constipation, unresponsive to any conservative treatment, were enrolled between January 2013 and December 2018. Patients’ quality of life [patient assessment of constipation quality of life (PAC-QOL) questionnaire], constipation scores (Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score) colonic transit time (CTT), orocecal transit time (OCTT), gastric and gallbladder kinetics, together with the assessment of the autonomic nerve function were evaluated before and during temporary SNS.

Results

14 patients (12 females, median age 38 years, range 24–42 years) had temporary SNS. The Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score did not change compared to baseline (23 ± 3 vs 21.4; p = 070). The PAC-QOL did not improve significantly during the stimulation period. Gallbladder/stomach motility (half-emptying time) did not change significantly before and after SNS. OCTT was delayed at baseline, as compared to standard internal normal values, and did not change during SNS. CTT did not improve significantly, although in two patients it decreased substantially from 97 to 53 h, and from 100 to 65 h.

Conclusions

Temporary SNS did not have any effect on upper/lower gastrointestinal motility and transit in patients with severe constipation.
Literature
1.
Thaha MA et al (2015) Sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence and constipation in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015(8):CD004464
2.
Altomare DF et al (2015) Long-term outcomes of sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence. Br J Surg 102(4):407–415CrossRef
3.
Datta SN et al (2008) Sacral neurostimulation for urinary retention: 10-year experience from one UK centre. BJU Int 101(2):192–196PubMed
4.
Kamm MA et al (2010) Sacral nerve stimulation for intractable constipation. Gut 59(3):333–340CrossRef
5.
Gortazar de Las Casas S et al (2019) Sacral nerve stimulation for constipation: long-term outcomes. Tech Coloproctol 23(6):559–564
6.
Holzer B et al (2008) Sacral nerve stimulation in patients with severe constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 51(5):524–529 (discussion 529–30)
7.
Maeda Y et al (2017) Long-term outcome of sacral neuromodulation for chronic refractory constipation. Tech Coloproctol 21(4):277–286CrossRef
8.
Ortiz H et al (2012) Functional outcome of sacral nerve stimulation in patients with severe constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 55(8):876–880CrossRef
9.
Patton V et al (2016) Sacral nerve stimulation fails to offer long-term benefit in patients with slow-transit constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 59(9):878–885CrossRef
10.
Graf W et al (2015) Results after sacral nerve stimulation for chronic constipation. Neurogastroenterol Motil 27(5):734–739CrossRef
11.
Widmann B et al (2019) Success and complication rates after sacral neuromodulation for fecal incontinence and constipation: a single-center follow-up study. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 25(1):159–170CrossRef
12.
Dasgupta R et al (2005) Changes in brain activity following sacral neuromodulation for urinary retention. J Urol 174(6):2268–2272CrossRef
13.
Carrington EV et al (2014) A systematic review of sacral nerve stimulation mechanisms in the treatment of fecal incontinence and constipation. Neurogastroenterol Motil 26(9):1222–1237CrossRef
14.
Fassov J et al (2014) A randomised, controlled study of small intestinal motility in patients treated with sacral nerve stimulation for irritable bowel syndrome. BMC Gastroenterol 14:111CrossRef
15.
Altomare DF et al (1999) Slow-transit constipation: solitary symptom of a systemic gastrointestinal disease. Dis Colon Rectum 42(2):231–240CrossRef
16.
Portincasa P et al (2003) Pan-enteric dysmotility, impaired quality of life and alexithymia in a large group of patients meeting ROME II criteria for irritable bowel syndrome. World J Gastroenterol 9(10):2293–2299CrossRef
17.
Knowles CH et al (1999) Sensory and autonomic neuropathy in patients with idiopathic slow-transit constipation. Br J Surg 86(1):54–60CrossRef
18.
Drossman DA, Dumitrascu DL (2006) Rome III: new standard for functional gastrointestinal disorders. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 15(3):237–241PubMed
19.
Marquis P et al (2005) Development and validation of the patient assessment of constipation quality of life questionnaire. Scand J Gastroenterol 40(5):540–551CrossRef
20.
Metcalf AM et al (1987) Simplified assessment of segmental colonic transit. Gastroenterology 92(1):40–47CrossRef
21.
Agachan F et al (1996) A constipation scoring system to simplify evaluation and management of constipated patients. Dis Colon Rectum 39(6):681–685CrossRef
22.
Heaton KW, Ghosh S, Braddon FE (1991) How bad are the symptoms and bowel dysfunction of patients with the irritable bowel syndrome? A prospective, controlled study with emphasis on stool form. Gut 32(1):73–79CrossRef
23.
Altomare D et al (1992) Detection of subclinical autonomic neuropathy in constipated patients using a sweat test. Gut 33(11):1539–1543CrossRef
24.
Chapleau MW, Sabharwal R (2011) Methods of assessing vagus nerve activity and reflexes. Heart Fail Rev 16(2):109–127CrossRef
25.
Diella G et al (2018) Distinct effects of two almond cultivars on agreeability and gastrointestinal motility in healthy subjects: more than mere nutraceuticals. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 27(1):31–39CrossRef
26.
Gasbarrini A et al (2009) Methodology and indications of H2-breath testing in gastrointestinal diseases: the Rome Consensus Conference. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 29(Suppl 1):1–49PubMed
27.
Knowles CH et al (2017) Surgery for constipation: systematic review and practice recommendations: results I: colonic resection. Colorectal Dis 19(Suppl 3):17–36CrossRef
28.
Dinning PG et al (2007) Sacral nerve stimulation induces pan-colonic propagating pressure waves and increases defecation frequency in patients with slow-transit constipation. Colorectal Dis 9(2):123–132CrossRef
29.
Dinning PG et al (2012) Pancolonic motor response to subsensory and suprasensory sacral nerve stimulation in patients with slow-transit constipation. Br J Surg 99(7):1002–1010CrossRef
30.
Zerbib F et al (2017) Randomized clinical trial of sacral nerve stimulation for refractory constipation. Br J Surg 104(3):205–213CrossRef
31.
Damon H, Dumas P, Mion F (2004) Impact of anal incontinence and chronic constipation on quality of life. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 28(1):16–20CrossRef
32.
Carriero A et al (2010) Sacral nerve stimulation for constipation: do we still miss something? Role of psychological evaluation. Int J Colorectal Dis 25(8):1005–1010CrossRef
33.
Tan K et al (2019) Placebo response rates in electrical nerve stimulation trials for fecal incontinence and constipation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuromodulation Online ahead of print
34.
Yiannakou Y et al (2019) A randomized double-blinded sham-controlled cross-over trial of tined-lead sacral nerve stimulation testing for chronic constipation. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 31(6):653–660CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Effects of temporary sacral nerve stimulation on gastrointestinal motility and function in patients with chronic refractory slow-transit constipation
Authors
D. F. Altomare
A. Picciariello
A. Di Ciaula
M. Rinaldi
M. De Fazio
P. Portincasa
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/s10151-020-02367-7

Other articles of this Issue 3/2021

Techniques in Coloproctology 3/2021 Go to the issue

Correspondence

Cure of enuresis/bowel dysfunction in children may provide insights for adult dysfunctions

The Last Image

Successful use of a pedicled anterolateral thigh flap for reconstruction of an abdominal wound and peristomal dehiscence

Correction

Correction to: Endo‑VAC® customization for sinus/anastomotic‑leaks/dehiscence after colorectal anastomosis

Correction

Correction to: Consensus Definitions and Interpretation Templates for Fluoroscopic Imaging of Defecatory Pelvic Floor Disorders

Original Article

Major colorectal resection is feasible using a new robotic surgical platform: the first report of a case series

Technical Note

Magnetic resonance imaging template to standardize reporting of anal fistulas