SynthesisUpdates in surgery2023
Tibial nerve electrical stimulation for fecal incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Updates in surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Finite element-based prioritization of pelvic floor muscles for rehabilitation to maintain urinary and fecal control in elderly women.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Scope transition and early arterial inflow control provide safe and comfortable dissection in robotic distal pancreatectomy.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Clinical application of double-capsule fecal catheter device in ICU patients with fecal incontinence.American journal of translational research · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Tibial nerve stimulation (TNS) therapy is widely used to treat fecal incontinence (FI), but still, some controversy exists. This study aimed to determine whether TNS could improve FI from different evaluation angles. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to provide indirect evidence of TNS treatment for FI. We searched for the original studies in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Ebsco Medline, Ovid Medline, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials published before November 31, 2021. The standardized mean difference was the efficacy analysis statistic, and the effect was expressed by the 95% confidence interval (CI). For the case series, we calculated the mean difference of the number of patients evaluated at baseline and last follow-up. Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs, four hundred and sixty participants) and eighteen case series (eight hundred and thirty-eight participants) were included in the study. The results of the RCTs showed that the number of weekly episodes of FI significantly reduced in the TNS group compared with the sham stimulation group. The results of the case series showed that TNS reduced the number of patients with FI per week. The Cleveland Clinic Florida FI Score significantly reduced. The post-treatment results of maximum squeeze pressure and maximum resting pressure were significantly different from baseline. This study showed that TNS to some extent reduced the number of patients with FI, reduced clinical symptoms, and improved anal physiological function. Despite the low quality of overall evidence, TNS still shows some potential as a safe treatment for FI.
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.