ReviewWorld journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology2016
Faecal incontinence: Current knowledges and perspectives.
Review in World journal of gastrointestinal pathophysiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urge fecal incontinence: are intramural rectal injections of botulinum toxin a long-term treatment option?Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Article
- The Role of Traditional Acupuncture in Patients with Fecal Incontinence-Mini-Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Is the extent of obstetric anal sphincter injury correlated with the severity of fecal incontinence in the long term?Techniques in coloproctology · 2020Article
- Usefulness of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Anorectal Physiologic Tests in Predicting Clinical Outcome for Fecal Incontinence.Annals of coloproctology · 2019Article
- Can wearing high heels influence anal canal pressure and the severity of fecal incontinence?International urogynecology journal · 2019Article
- Medium-term outcome of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation in the treatment of fecal incontinence.Techniques in coloproctology · 2018Article
- Electrophysiological Basis of Fecal Incontinence and Its Implications for Treatment.Annals of coloproctology · 2017Review
- Electrical stimulation structurally affects the tissues of the rectum and anus of nulliparous rats.Journal of anatomy · 2017Article
- Prospective evaluation of transanal irrigation for fecal incontinence and constipation.Techniques in coloproctology · 2017Article
- Gut bioengineering promotes gut repair and pharmaceutical research: a review.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Faecal incontinence (FI) is a disabling and frequent symptom since its prevalence can vary between 5% and 15% of the general population. It has a particular negative impact on quality of life. Many tools are currently available for the treatment of FI, from conservative measures to invasive surgical treatments. The conservative treatment may be dietetic measures, various pharmacological agents, anorectal rehabilitation, posterior tibial nerve stimulation, and transanal irrigation. If needed, patients may have miniinvasive approaches such as sacral nerve modulation or antegrade irrigation. In some cases, a surgical treatment is proposed, mainly external anal sphincter repair. Although these different therapeutic options are available, new techniques are arriving allowing new hopes for the patients. Moreover, most of them are non-invasive such as local application of an α1-adrenoceptor agonist, stem cell injections, rectal injection of botulinum toxin, acupuncture. New more invasive techniques with promising results are also coming such as anal magnetic sphincter and antropylorus transposition. This review reports the main current available treatments of FI and the developing therapeutics tools.
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.