ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2020
Comparison of long-term outcome of sacral nerve stimulation for constipation and faecal incontinence with focus on explantation rate, additional visits, and patient satisfaction.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Technical and functional outcome after sacral neuromodulation using the "H" technique.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2023Article
- Management of fecal incontinence: what specialists need to know?Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023Article
- Current Overview on Clinical Management of Chronic Constipation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Modifying the Collateral Symptoms in Patients with Parkinson's Disease.Annals of Indian Academy of NeurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the present study was to compare sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) for constipation (SNS-C) with SNS for idiopathic faecal incontinence (SNS-IFI) regarding explantation rate, additional visits, and improvement of patient satisfaction 5 years after implantation.
methodsFrom our prospective database (launched in 2009), we extracted all SNS-C patients 5 years post-implantation, and the SNS-IFI patients implanted just before and just after each SNS-C patient. We retrospectively evaluated the explantation rate, number of additional visits, and patient satisfaction using a visual analogue scale (VAS). We hypothesized that compared with those in the SNS-IFI group: (1) the explantation rate would be higher in SNS-C patients, (2) the number of additional visits would be higher in SNS-C patients, and (3) in patients with an active implant at 5 years, the improvement in VAS would be the same.
resultsWe included 40 SNS-C patients and 80 SNS-IFI patients. In the SNS-C group 7/40 (17.5%), patients were explanted, compared to 10/80 (12.5%) patients in the SNS-IFI group (p = 0.56). The mean number of additional visits in the SNS-C group was 3.5 (95% CI 2.8-4.1)) and 3.0 (95% CI 2.6-3.6)) in the SNS-IFI group (p = 0.38). Additional visits due to loss of efficacy were significantly higher in the SNS-C patients (p = 0.03). The reduction in VAS score (delta VAS) at 5 years was 37.1 (95% CI 20.9-53.3) in the SNS-C group, and 46.0 (95% CI 37.9-54.0) in the SNS-IFI group (p = 0.27).
conclusionsNo significant difference was found regarding explantation rate, number of additional visits, or improvement of VAS at 5 years after SNS implantation between SNS-C patients and SNS-IFI patients.
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.