ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
Long-term outcome after SphinKeeper® surgery for treating fecal incontinence-who are good candidates?
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial sphincter with a new silicone band for treating faecal incontinence: IDEAL 2b prospective multicentre trial.BJS open · 2025Trial
- Treatment of fecal incontinence-is there a light in the end of the tunnel?Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe efficacy of the novel SphinKeeper® procedure for the treatment of fecal incontinence (FI) is not yet well defined. This study aimed to assess long-term functional outcomes after SphinKeeper® surgery.
methodsWe included 32 patients with FI (28 female), who were operated at a tertiary referral center between August 2018 and September 2021. Functional outcome and quality of life were evaluated prospectively using validated questionnaires before and after surgery. Additionally, endoanal ultrasound and anal manometry were conducted prior and after SphinKeeper® implantation. Predictive parameters for treatment success were defined.
resultsThe mean follow-up time was 22.62 ± 8.82 months. The St. Mark's incontinence score decreased significantly after surgery (median preoperative = 19 (IQR 17-22) versus median last follow-up = 12 (IQR 8-16), p = 0.001). Similarly, physical short-form health survey showed a significant improvement after SphinKeeper® implantation (p = 0.011). Patients with a higher degree of internal sphincter defect showed an improved objective therapy success (r = 0.633, p = 0.015) after SphinKeeper® operation, whereas the type and severity of FI had no impact on the functional outcome. Notably, a higher number of dislocated prostheses (r = 0.772, p = 0.015) showed a significant correlation with reduced improvement of incontinence.
conclusionThe SphinKeeper® procedure showed a significant long-term functional improvement in over half of the patients. Patients with a higher internal sphincter defect benefited most, whereas dislocation of the prostheses was associated with less favorable results.
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.