SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2018
Sacral nerve stimulation versus percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of Tibial Nerve Electrostimulation in Patients With Fecal Incontinence: A Systematic Review.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2026Pooled it
- Therapeutic strategies for low anterior resection syndrome: an umbrella review of systematic reviews.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Pooled it
- Is percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) effective for fecal incontinence (FI) in adults compared with sham electrical stimulation? A meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2024Pooled it
- Guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of Faecal Incontinence-A UEG/ESCP/ESNM/ESPCG collaboration.United European gastroenterology journal · 2022Guideline
- The Efficacy of Transcutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation as an Adjunct to Standard Rehabilitation for Postpartum Pelvic Floor Dyssynergic Defecation in Primiparous Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial.International urogynecology journal · 2026Trial
- Outcomes of a novel multidisciplinary approach to delivering sacral neuromodulation services away from the operating theatre.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2026Observational
- Neuromodulation Strategies to Reduce Inflammation and Improve Lung Complications in COVID-19 Patients.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Review
- Constipation and Fecal Incontinence in the Elderly.Current gastroenterology reports · 2020Review
- Article
- What Is New in Neuromodulation?Current urology reports · 2019Review
- Acupuncture for fecal incontinence: Protocol for a systematic review and data mining.Medicine · 2019Article
- Cost-effectiveness of sacral nerve stimulation and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2018Article
- [Treatment of Fecal Incontinence: A Surgical Approach].Acta gastroenterologica LatinoamericanaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsPercutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) and sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) are both second-line treatments for faecal incontinence (FI). To compare the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of SNS versus PTNS for treating FI in adults.
methodA literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane was performed in order to identify studies comparing SNS and PTNS for treating FI. A risk of bias assessment was performed using The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. A random effects model was used for the meta-analysis.
resultsFour studies (one randomised controlled trial and three nonrandomised prospective studies) reported on 302 patients: 109 underwent SNS and 193 underwent PTNS. All included studies noted an improvement in symptoms after treatment, without any significant difference in efficacy between SNS and PTNS. Meta-analysis demonstrated that the Wexner score improved significantly with SNS compared to PTNS (weighted mean difference 2.27; 95% confidence interval 3.42, 1.12; P < 0.01). Moreover, SNS was also associated with a significant reduction in FI episodes per week and a greater improvement in the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life coping and depression domains, compared to PTNS on short-term follow-up. Only two studies reported on adverse events, reporting no serious adverse events with neither SNS nor PTNS.
conclusionCurrent evidence suggests that SNS results in significantly improved functional outcomes and quality of life compared to PTNS. No serious adverse events were identified with either treatment. Further, high-quality, multi-centre randomised controlled trials with standardised outcome measures and long-term follow-up are required in this field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29470730What 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.