Top

Techniques in Coloproctology

Published in:

01-06-2011 | Original Article

The relationship between etiology, symptom severity and indications of surgery in cases of anal incontinence: a 25-year analysis of 1,046 patients at a tertiary coloproctology practice

Authors: A. Bondurri, A. P. Zbar, H. Tapia, F. Boffi, M. Pescatori

Published in: Techniques in Coloproctology | Issue 2/2011

Abstract

Background

The etiology of anal incontinence (AI) is often multifactorial. There is little data on the relationship between the etiology of AI, symptom severity, and the need for surgery. The aim of our study was to investigate this association in a large number of unselected patients with AI referred to a tertiary specialist coloproctological practice.

Methods

Patients with AI seen at our unit between 1983 and 2008 were analyzed. The main etiologies were categorized as congenital, traumatic, neurologic, idiopathic, post-operative, post-obstetric, secondary to rectal prolapse, or inflammatory bowel disease. The severity of AI was graded using the validated Pescatori incontinence scale.

Results

Overall, 1,046 patients were studied. The AI score was higher in patients with congenital (4.7 ± 1.1), traumatic (4.6 ± 1.4), and neurological (4.4 ± 1.2) incontinence. Surgical treatment was indicated in 214 cases (20.5%). Patients with AI related to trauma and congenital anomalies required surgery in 43.5 and 31.4% of cases, respectively, a percentage significantly higher than that for patients with other etiologies (P = 0.002). Prolapse-related AI usually responded to correction of the prolapse.

Conclusions

Patients with congenital, traumatic, and neurological AI tend to have greater symptom severity. Traumatic, rectal prolapse-related, and congenital AI cases more often require surgery.

Soffer EE, Hull T (2000) Fecal incontinence: a practical approach to evaluation and treatment. Am J Gastroenterol 95:1873–1880PubMedCrossRef

Perry S, Shaw C, McGrother C et al (2002) Prevalence of faecal incontinence in adults aged 40 years or more living in the community. Gut 50:480–484PubMedCrossRef

Nelson RL (2004) Epidemiology of fecal incontinence. Gastroenterology 126:S3–S7PubMedCrossRef

Akpan A, Gosney MA, Barret J (2007) Factors contributing to fecal incontinence in older people and outcome of routine management in home, hospital and nursing home settings. Clin Interv Aging 2:139–145PubMedCrossRef

Rothbarth J, Bemelman WA, Meijerink WJ et al (2001) What is the impact of fecal incontinence on quality of life? Dis Colon Rectum 44:67–71PubMedCrossRef

Farage MA, Miller KW, Berardesca E, Maibach HI (2008) Psychosocial and societal burden of incontinence in the aged population: a review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 277:285–290PubMedCrossRef

Williams A, Lavender T, Richmond DH, Tincello DG (2005) Women’s experiences after a third-degree obstetric anal sphincter tear: a qualitative study. Birth 32:129–136PubMedCrossRef

Pescatori M, Anastasio G, Bottini C, Mentasti A (1992) New grading and scoring for anal incontinence. Evaluation of 335 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 35:482–487PubMedCrossRef

Boffi F, Ayabaca S, Corradi A, Renzi C, Pescatori M (2002) Etiology and severity of symptoms of fecal incontinence: is there a correlation? Int J Colorectal Dis 17:59–60PubMedCrossRef

10.

Nichols CM, Ramakrishnan V, Gill EJ, Hurt WG (2005) Anal incontinence in women with and those without pelvic floor disorders. Obstet Gynecol 106:1266–1271PubMedCrossRef

11.

Engel AF, Kamm MA, Bartram CI, Nicholls RJ (1995) Relationship of symptoms in faecal incontinence to specific sphincter abnormalities. Int J Colorect Dis 10:152–155CrossRef

12.

Fisher K, Bliss DZ, Savik K (2008) Comparison of recall and daily self-report of fecal incontinence severity. J Wound Ostomy Cont Nurs 35:515–520CrossRef

13.

Terra MP, Deutekom M, Dobben AC et al (2008) Can the outcome of pelvic-floor rehabilitation in patients with fecal incontinence be predicted? Int J Colorectal Dis 23:503–511PubMedCrossRef

14.

Bordeianou L, Lee KY, Rockwood T et al (2008) Anal resting pressures at manometry correlate with the fecal incontinence severity index and with the presence of sphincter defects on ultrasound. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1010–1014PubMedCrossRef

15.

Deutekom M, Dobben AC, Terra MP (2007) Clinical presentation of fecal incontinence and anorectal function: what is the relationship? Am J Gastroenterol 102:351–361PubMedCrossRef

16.

Sun WM, Donnelly TC, Read NW (1992) Utility of a combined test of anorectal manometry, electromyography and sensation in determining the mechanism of ‘idiopathic’ faecal incontinence. Gut 33:807–813PubMedCrossRef

17.

Fox JC, Fletcher JG, Zinsmeister AR, Seide B, Riederer SJ, Bharucha AE (2006) Effect of aging on anorectal and pelvic floor functions in females. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1726–1735PubMedCrossRef

18.

Titi M, Jenkins JT, Urie A, Molloy RG (2007) Prospective study of the diagnostic evaluation of faecal incontinence and leakage in male patients. Colorect Dis 9:647–652CrossRef

19.

Rao SS, Ozturk R, Stessman M (2004) Investigation of the pathophysiology of fecal seepage. Am J Gastroenterol 99:2204–2209PubMedCrossRef

20.

Bharucha AE, Seide BM, Zinsmeister AR, Melton LJ 3rd (2008) Relation of bowel habits to fecal incontinence in women. Am J Gastroenterol 103:1470–1475PubMedCrossRef

21.

Thekkinkattil DK, Lim M, Stojkovic SG, Finan PJ, Sagar PM, Burke D (2008) A classification system for faecal incontinence based on anorectal investigations. Br J Surg 95:222–228PubMedCrossRef

22.

Bharucha AE, Fletcher JG, Harper CM et al (2005) Relationship between symptoms and disordered continence mechanisms in women with idiopathic faecal incontinence. Gut 54:546–555PubMedCrossRef

23.

Mimura T, Kaminishi M, Kamm MA (2004) Diagnostic evaluation of patients with faecal incontinence at a specialist institution. Dig Surg 21:235–241PubMedCrossRef

24.

Vaizey CJ, Carapeti E, Cahill JA, Kamm MA (1999) Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems. Gut 44:77–80PubMedCrossRef

25.

Jorge JM, Wexner SD (1993) Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36:77–97PubMedCrossRef

26.

Rockwood TH, Church J, Fleshman JW et al (2000) Fecal Incontinence quality of life scale: quality of life instrument for patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 43:9–16PubMedCrossRef

27.

Pescatori M, Zbar AP (2009) Tailored surgery for internal and external rectal prolapse: functional results of 268 patients operated upon by a single surgeon over a 21-year period. Colorectal Dis Jul 15 [Epub ahead of print]

28.

Rintala R, Mildh L, Lindahl H (1994) Fecal continence and quality of life for adult patients with an operated high or intermediate anorectal malformation. J Pediatr Surg 29:777–780PubMedCrossRef

29.

Iwai N, Deguchi E, Kimura O, Kubota Y, Ono S, Shimadera S (2007) Social quality of life for adult patients with anorectal malformations. J Pediatr Surg 42:313–317PubMedCrossRef

30.

Zbar AP, Beer-Gabel M, Chiappa AC, Aslam M (2001) Fecal incontinence after minor anorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 44:1610–1623PubMedCrossRef

31.

Abbasakoor F, Nelson M, Beynon J, Patel B, Carr ND (1998) Anal endosonography in patients with anorectal symptoms after haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 85:1522–1524PubMedCrossRef

32.

Casillas S, Hull TL, Zutshi M, Trzcinski R, Bast JF, Xu M (2005) Incontinence after a lateral internal sphincterotomy: are we underestimating it? Dis Colon Rectum 48:1193–1199PubMedCrossRef

33.

Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Nicholls RJ, Bartram CI (1994) Prospective study of the extent of lateral anal sphincterotomy division during lateral sphincterotomy. Dis Colon Rectum 37:1031–1033PubMedCrossRef

34.

Zbar AP, Kmiot WA, Aslam M et al (1999) Use of vector volume manometry and endoanal magnetic resonance imaging in the adult female for assessment of anal sphincter dysfunction. Dis Colon Rectum 42:1411–1418PubMedCrossRef

35.

Cotterill N, Norton C, Avery KN, Abrams P, Donovan JL (2008) A patient-centered approach to developing a comprehensive symptom and quality of life assessment of anal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 51:82–87PubMedCrossRef

Title: The relationship between etiology, symptom severity and indications of surgery in cases of anal incontinence: a 25-year analysis of 1,046 patients at a tertiary coloproctology practice
Authors: A. Bondurri
A. P. Zbar
H. Tapia
F. Boffi
M. Pescatori
Publication date: 01-06-2011
Publisher: Springer Milan
Published in: Techniques in Coloproctology / Issue 2/2011
Print ISSN: 1123-6337
Electronic ISSN: 1128-045X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-011-0682-8

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

The relationship between etiology, symptom severity and indications of surgery in cases of anal incontinence: a 25-year analysis of 1,046 patients at a tertiary coloproctology practice

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2011

Optimal timing of anticoagulation pre- and post-colonoscopy with polypectomy

Protection of intestinal anastomosis with biological glues: an experimental randomized controlled trial

Perforated left-sided diverticulitis with faecal peritonitis: is the Hinchey classification the best guide for surgical decision making?

Transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) for selected fourth-degree haemorrhoids

The negative effects of surgery persist beyond the early postoperative period after laparoscopic colorectal resection

The umbilicus as a site for defunctioning ileostomies