Evidence map›Paper›PMID 1462614›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of surgery

Fecal incontinence: indications for repairing the anal sphincter.

F Penninckx

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Anorectal physiology measurements are of no value in clinical practice. True or false?Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 1994
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

F PenninckxDepartment of Abdominal Surgery, University Clinics Gasthuisberg, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Incontinent patients should be comprehensively investigated by objective tests, especially manometry, continence tests, and electromyography. Manometry can be used to predict the functional outcome and to calibrate the sphincter repair. Pure anatomical defects of the anal and pelvic musculature deserve surgical correction with or without overlapping the muscle ends. If the repair is delayed it should be done after a 3 month interval. A protective colostomy has to be performed in complex cases and in cases with septic complications. Before closing the colostomy, the ano-rectal function should be assessed. Acceptable continence can be restored in the majority of the patients, the outcome depending on the extent of local defects and the severity of concomitant pelvic floor neuropathy. Skeletal muscle transposition remains an esoteric approach to be used only in selected patients; the implantation of a neuromuscular stimulator seems to be warranted. In the presence of important functional deficits, sphincter repair may create a situation where additional conservative measures become more effective. A post-anal repair may be considered 3-12 months after rectopexy or sphincter repair. Incontinence based on pure functional defects is initially treated conservatively. A post-anal repair may improve the situation in two thirds of the patients but fails to help those who need it most. Failure seems to be related to a continuing neuropathic process. A peri-anal prosthetic band implant may be a valuable alternative in such patients. A sigmoidostomy is a measure of last resort. The prevention of fecal incontinence is most important and concerns surgeons, obstetricians, and physicians.

Indexed as

Fecal IncontinenceAnus DiseasesElectromyographyHumansManometryPostoperative CarePreoperative CarePrognosisTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID1462614
OpenAlexW2032420911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.