Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34160664›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2021

Sacral nerve stimulation in patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

C Seifarth, N Slavova, C Degro, K S Lehmann, M E Kreis, B Weixler

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C Seifarth *Department of General, Visceral, and Vascular Surgery, Berlin Institute of Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. claudia.seifarth@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6102-4338
N Slavova *Department of General, Visceral, and Vascular Surgery, Berlin Institute of Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. claudia.seifarth@charite.de.
C DegroDepartment of General, Visceral, and Vascular Surgery, Berlin Institute of Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
K S LehmannDepartment of General, Visceral, and Vascular Surgery, Berlin Institute of Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0479-3821
M E KreisDepartment of General, Visceral, and Vascular Surgery, Berlin Institute of Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9312-4840
B WeixlerDepartment of General, Visceral, and Vascular Surgery, Berlin Institute of Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3652-4792
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFunctional results after proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) are generally good. However, some patients suffer from high stool frequency or fecal incontinence. Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) may represent a therapeutic alternative in these patients, but little is known about indication and results. The aim of this study was to evaluate incontinence after IPAA and demonstrate SNS feasibility in these patients.

methodsThis retrospective study includes patients who received a SNS between 1993 and 2020 for increased stool frequency or fecal incontinence after proctocolectomy with IPAA for ulcerative colitis. Proctocolectomy was performed in a two- or three-step approach with ileostomy closure as the last step. Demographic, follow-up data and functional results were obtained from the hospital database.

resultsSNS was performed in 23 patients. Median follow-up time after SNS was 6.5 years (min. 4.2-max. 8.8). Two patients were lost to follow-up. The median time from ileostomy closure to SNS implantation was 6 years (min. 0.5-max. 14.5). Continence after SNS improved in 16 patients (69%) with a median St. Marks score for anal incontinence of 19 (min. 4-max. 22) before SNS compared to 4 (0-10) after SNS placement (p = 0.012). In seven patients, SNS therapy was not successful.

conclusionSNS implantation improves symptoms in over two-thirds of patients suffering from high stool frequency or fecal incontinence after proctocolectomy with IPAA. Awareness of the beneficial effects of SNS should be increased in physicians involved in the management of these patients.

Indexed as

Colitis, UlcerativeColonic PouchesFecal IncontinenceProctocolectomy, RestorativeAnastomosis, SurgicalHumansPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeFecal incontinenceIPAAProctocolectomySacral nerve stimulationUlcerative colitis

Identifiers

PMID34160664
PMCPMC8346414
OpenAlexW3174244331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.