Propiverine Hydrochloride as a Treatment for Fecal Incontinence

Propiverine hydrochloride (PH) is widely used for the treatment of urinary incontinence (UI) due to bladder overactivity. Moreover, the comorbidity of UI with fecal incontinence (FI) is known to be due to the relationship of both to nervous system disorders and dysfunction or weakening of the pelvic floor muscles. The aim of this single-arm prospective study was to evaluate the therapeutic value of PH for FI.Methods: Patients (n = 24) who were diagnosed as having both FI and UI from April 2015 to November 2016 were included in the study and administered a dosage of 10–20 mg PH every day for 1 month. The primary endpoint was to create a reduction in the frequency of FI per week. An evaluation criterion of ≥50% reduction in frequency was determined as effective. The percentage of the patients who achieved the ≥50% endpoint (responders) was also calculated.Results: The frequency of FI per week was 6.0 ± 8.2 (0.25–30) at baseline and reduced to 1.6 ± 2.1 (0–7) at the posttherapeutic state (P = 0.005). A reduction of ≥50% was seen in 14 of the patients (58.3%).Conclusion: PH reduced the frequency of FI in patients with both FI and UI. This study introduces a possible therapeutic option for the pharmacological treatment of FI.

Clinical efficacy of adalimumab versus infliximab and the factors associated with recurrence or aggravation during treatment of anal fistulas in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Infliximab has proven to be effective in the treatment of perianal fistulas in Crohn's disease (CD) but the efficacy of adalimumab is still unclear. The aim of this study is to assess the clinical efficacy of adalimumab and compare the results with those for infliximab. METHODS: Forty-seven CD patients treated for perianal fistulas with infliximab from September 2005 to December 2010 (n=31), or with adalimumab from November 2010 to May 2012 (n=16), were enrolled in this retrospective study. The following patient characteristics were analyzed; intestinal lesion site, fistula classification, seton placement, index of inflammatory bowel disease, C-reactive protein level, follow-up period, and the cumulative rate of nonrecurrence or aggravation of fistula. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the intestinal lesion site, fistula classification, inflammatory bowel disease index, C-reactive protein level, and the frequency of injection between the infliximab group and the adalimumab group. The cumulative rate of nonrecurrence or aggravation of fistula was 62.5% in the adalimumab group and 83.9% in the infliximab group at 24 months after treatment (P=0.09). The risk factors for recurrence or aggravation may be related to seton placement (P=0.02), gender (P=0.06), and fistula classification (P=0.07). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the clinical efficacy of adalimumab and infliximab in the treatment of perianal fistulas in CD. However, fistula classification may be an important risk factor for recurrence or aggravation. The preliminary findings in this study show that further research is warranted.