Mowatt G, Glazener C, Jarrett M
Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27(3):155-61. doi: 10.1002/nau.20565.
Fecal incontinence and constipation are disabling conditions that reduce quality of life. If conservative treatment fails, one option is sacral nerve stimulation (SNS), a minimally invasive technique allowing modulation of the nerves and muscles of the pelvic floor and hindgut.
To assess the effects of SNS for fecal incontinence and constipation in adults.
We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialized Trials Register (searched 24 April 2007) and the reference lists of relevant articles.
All randomized or quasi-randomized trials assessing the effects of SNS for fecal incontinence or constipation in adults.
Two review authors independently screened the search results, assessed the methodological quality of the included studies, and undertook data extraction.
Three crossover studies were included. Two, enrolling 34 (Leroi) and two participants (Vaizey), assessed the effects of SNS for fecal incontinence, and one (Kenefick), enrolling two participants, assessed SNS for constipation. In the study by Leroi, following the crossover period, participants, while still blinded, chose the period of stimulation they had preferred. Outcomes at different time points were reported separately for 19 participants who preferred the "on" and five who preferred the "off" period. For the group of 19, the median (range) episodes of fecal incontinence per week fell from 1.7 (0-9) during the "off" period to 0.7 (0-5) during the "on" period; for the group of five, however, the median (range) rose from 1.7 (0-11) during the "off" period compared with 3.7 (0-11) during the "on" period. Vaizey reported an average of six, and one, episodes of fecal incontinence per week during the "off" and "on" periods, respectively. Leroi reported that four of 27 participants experienced an adverse event resulting in removal of the stimulator; Vaizey did not report adverse events. For SNS for constipation, during the "off" crossover period the participants experienced an average of two bowel movements per week, compared with five during the "on" period. Abdominal pain and bloating occurred 79% of the time during the "off" period compared with 33% during the "on" period. No adverse events occurred.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The very limited evidence from the included studies suggests that SNS can improve continence in selected people with fecal incontinence, and reduce symptoms in selected people with constipation. However, temporary, percutaneous stimulation for a 2-3-week period does not always successfully identify those for whom a permanent implant will be beneficial. Larger, good quality randomized crossover trials are needed to allow the effects of SNS for these conditions to be assessed with more certainty.
大便失禁和便秘是会降低生活质量的致残性病症。若保守治疗失败,一种选择是骶神经刺激(SNS),这是一种微创技术,可调节盆底和后肠的神经与肌肉。
评估SNS对成人大便失禁和便秘的疗效。
我们检索了Cochrane尿失禁组专业试验注册库(检索日期为2007年4月24日)以及相关文章的参考文献列表。
所有评估SNS对成人大便失禁或便秘疗效的随机或半随机试验。
两位综述作者独立筛选检索结果,评估纳入研究的方法学质量,并进行数据提取。
纳入了三项交叉研究。两项研究(Leroi研究纳入34名参与者,Vaizey研究纳入2名参与者)评估了SNS对大便失禁的疗效,一项研究(Kenefick研究纳入2名参与者)评估了SNS对便秘的疗效。在Leroi的研究中,交叉期结束后,参与者在仍处于盲态的情况下选择了他们偏好的刺激期。分别报告了19名偏好“开启”期和5名偏好“关闭”期的参与者在不同时间点的结果。对于19人组,每周大便失禁发作的中位数(范围)从“关闭”期的1.7次(0 - 9次)降至“开启”期的0.7次(0 - 5次);然而,对于5人组,每周大便失禁发作的中位数(范围)从“关闭”期的1.7次(0 - 11次)升至“开启”期的3.7次(0 - 11次)。Vaizey报告“关闭”期和“开启”期每周大便失禁发作的平均数分别为6次和1次。Leroi报告27名参与者中有4人经历了不良事件,导致刺激器移除;Vaizey未报告不良事件。对于SNS治疗便秘,在“关闭”交叉期,参与者每周平均排便2次,而在“开启”期为5次。腹痛和腹胀在“关闭”期出现的时间为79%,而在“开启”期为33%。未发生不良事件。
纳入研究的证据非常有限,提示SNS可改善部分大便失禁患者的控便能力,并减轻部分便秘患者的症状。然而,为期2 - 3周的临时经皮刺激并不总能成功识别出适合永久植入的患者。需要开展更大规模、高质量的随机交叉试验,以便更确切地评估SNS对这些病症的疗效。