SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
The prevalence, pathophysiology, and treatment of fecal incontinence in patients with Crohn's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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.
- Prevalence of Comorbidities in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Umbrella Review of 18 Systematic Reviews.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Association between geriatric nutritional risk index and fecal incontinence in individuals with stroke: mediating roles of systemic immune inflammation index and oxidative balance scores.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fecal incontinence (FI) is a common complication in patients with Crohn's disease (CD), but there is a relative lack of comprehensive information on its prevalence, pathophysiology, and treatment interventions. This study aims to systematically evaluate the prevalence, pathophysiology, and treatment interventions of FI in patients with CD, providing a reliable dataset for clinical reference. Methods: As of October 2024, articles were identified through a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus databases. The review included literature on the prevalence, pathophysiology, and treatment interventions for FI in patients with CD. Using the Stata 14.0 software package, the prevalence of FI among patients with CD was estimated with a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by calculating the I Results: In this analysis, a total of 25 studies were included. Fifteen of these studies assessed the prevalence of FI among 7232 patients with CD, yielding a pooled estimated prevalence of 34.8% (95% CI: 24.0%-46.5%). Six studies investigated the pathophysiology, suggesting that FI may be associated with decreased anal resting pressure, rectal compliance, and altered rectal sensation. Five studies evaluated potential treatment interventions, indicating that neuromodulation therapies such as posterior tibial nerve stimulation and sacral nerve stimulation may be effective for FI. Anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy in conjunction with surgical interventions may improve FI. Furthermore, pelvic floor behavioral treatment may improve FI and enhance quality of life when pharmacological treatments are ineffective. Conclusion: This study provides insights into the prevalence, pathophysiology, and treatment interventions of FI among patients with CD. The findings indicate that the prevalence of FI in CD patients is 34.8%. Further research is necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the pathophysiology of FI and to develop effective management and treatment interventions. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/displayy _record.php?ID=CRD42024583028, identifier CRD42024583028.
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.