4.4 Article

Long-term outcome of sacral neuromodulation for chronic refractory constipation

期刊

TECHNIQUES IN COLOPROCTOLOGY
卷 21, 期 4, 页码 277-286

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-017-1613-0

关键词

Sacral neuromodulation; Sacral nerve stimulation; Constipation

资金

  1. Medtronic International Sarl
  2. Medtronic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Sacral neuromodulation has been reported as a treatment for severe idiopathic constipation. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term effects of sacral neuromodulation by following patients who participated in a prospective, open-label, multicentre study up to 5 years. Methods Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months. Symptoms and quality of life were assessed using bowel diary, the Cleveland Clinic constipation score and the Short Form-36 quality-of-life scale. Results Sixty-two patients (7 male, median age 40 years) underwent test stimulation, and 45 proceeded to permanent implantation. Twenty-seven patients exited the study (7 withdrawn consent, 7 loss of efficacy, 6 site-specific reasons, 4 withdrew other reasons, 2 lost to follow-up, 1 prior to follow-up). Eighteen patients (29%) attended 60-month follow-up. In 10 patients who submitted bowel diary, their improvement of symptoms was sustained: the number of defecations per week (4.1 +/- 3.7 vs 8.1 +/- 3.4, mean +/- standard deviation, p < 0.001, baseline vs 60 months) and sensation of incomplete emptying (0.8 +/- 0.3 vs 0.2 +/- 0.1, p = 0.002). In 14 patients (23%) with Cleveland Clinic constipation score, improvement was sustained at 60 months [17.9 +/- 4.4 (baseline) to 10.4 +/- 4.1, p < 0.001]. Some 103 device-related adverse events were reported in 27 (61%). Conclusion Benefit from sacral neuromodulation in the long-term was observed in a small minority of patients with intractable constipation. The results should be interpreted with caution given the high dropout and complication rate during the follow-up period.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据