SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2021
Insert devices for faecal incontinence.
Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of Faecal Incontinence-A UEG/ESCP/ESNM/ESPCG collaboration.United European gastroenterology journal · 2022Guideline
- Clinical Trial: Effectiveness and Safety of a Novel Anal Insert Device for Treatment of Faecal Incontinence.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2026Trial
- The Japan Society of Coloproctology Practice Guidelines for Fecal Incontinence 2024 (Revised Second Edition).Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2026Review
- Research progress in female pelvic floor rehabilitation aids.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2024Review
- Management of fecal incontinence: what specialists need to know?Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023Article
- A search for new options to manage fecal incontinence.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- Longstanding 'outlet challenge'.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFaecal incontinence (FI) affects 1-19% of the general population and carries significant physical and psychological morbidity. Treatment strategies vary greatly with respect to morbidity and efficacy and relatively little is known regarding the role of mechanical devices such as anal and vaginal inserts. This is an up-to-date systematic review of the use of these devices in the management of patients with FI.
methodsA systematic electronic search was performed of the Medline, Pubmed and Embase databases using the key words and/or MeSH 'anal plug', 'anal insert', 'vaginal insert' and 'faecal incontinence'. Only articles that reported clinical outcomes for these devices for FI in the English language were included. Review articles were excluded to avoid duplication of data.
resultsThirteen articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Two articles reported outcomes for the Eclipse vaginal insert and 11 articles reported on three types of anal inserts; the Coloplast 'Tulip' design (6), the Procon/ProTect device (2) and the Renew insert (3). When tolerated, both anal and vaginal inserts significantly improved continence, bowel function and quality of life where reported. Adverse effects included discomfort, leakage and slippage. Long-term compliance and benefit are yet to be determined.
conclusionsVaginal and anal inserts may be a useful treatment for FI. Better quality of evidence is needed to define its effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32870438What 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.