ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2016
Implantation of SphinKeeper(TM): a new artificial anal sphincter.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03080753 (Treatment of Anal Incontinence Using Intersphincteric Implants), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Treatment of Anal Incontinence Using Intersphincteric Implants (SphinKeeper)
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical effectiveness and safety of self-expandable implantable bulking agents for faecal incontinence: a systematic review.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Pooled it
- Artificial sphincter with a new silicone band for treating faecal incontinence: IDEAL 2b prospective multicentre trial.BJS open · 2025Trial
- The Japan Society of Coloproctology Practice Guidelines for Fecal Incontinence 2024 (Revised Second Edition).Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2026Review
- Diagnostic tools for fecal incontinence: Scoring systems are the crucial first step.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Endosonographic monitoring of SphinkeeperUpdates in surgery · 2024Observational
- Faecal incontinence-a comprehensive review.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Review
- Long-term outcome after SphinKeeper® surgery for treating fecal incontinence-who are good candidates?Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- An evaluation of the long-term effectiveness of Gatekeeper™ intersphincteric implants for passive faecal incontinence.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Article
- Critical appraisal of international guidelines for the management of fecal incontinence in adults: is it possible to define what to do in different clinical scenarios?Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Review
- Sphinkeeper Procedure for Treating Severe Faecal Incontinence-A Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Surgical Treatment Alternatives to Sacral Neuromodulation for Fecal Incontinence: Injectables, Sphincter Repair, and Colostomy.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2021Review
- Efficacy of Sphinkeeper™ implant in treating faecal incontinence.The British journal of surgery · 2020Observational
- Sphinkeeper™ for faecal incontinence: a preliminary report.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2020Article
- Gatekeeper Improves Voluntary Contractility in Patients With Fecal Incontinence.Surgical innovation · 2019Article
- Outcomes of GatekeeperTechniques in coloproctology · 2017Observational
- Fecal incontinence - Challenges and solutions.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Review
- Artificial Muscle Devices: Innovations and Prospects for Fecal Incontinence Treatment.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA new artificial anal sphincter, SphinKeeper(TM), was devised with the aim to treat fecal incontinence (FI) by implanting specifically designed self-expandable prostheses into the intersphincteric space. Preliminary data concerning the procedure feasibility and prosthesis localization at 3 months are presented.
methodsSphinKeeper(TM) prostheses in the native state are dehydrated, thin, solid cylinder (length 29 mm, diameter 3 mm), changing their state (shorter--length 23 mm, thicker--diameter 7 mm--and softer, with shape memory) within 48 h of contact with fluids. In this study, 10 prostheses were implanted in each patient with FI under local anesthesia and under endoanal ultrasound (EAUS) guidance, into the upper-middle intersphincteric space of the anal canal by a specifically designed delivery system. EAUS was used postoperatively to assess prostheses dislocation.
resultsTen patients (5 females; median age 58 years, range 20-75) were enrolled and treated with SphinKeeper(TM) implantation. Median duration of procedure (performed by endoanal ultrasound guidance) was 40 min (range 30-45). Neither intraoperative nor postoperative complications were reported after a 3-month follow-up. In one patient, a partial dislocation of a single prosthesis was documented by EAUS, causing anal discomfort which resolved after 1 week.
conclusionSphinKeeper(TM) can be safely implanted in patients with FI of different etiology. Implantation was well tolerated with no dislodgment of implants at 3-month follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.