Subject(s)
Colonic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Occult Blood , Aged , False Negative Reactions , Female , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Pudendal nerve stimulation (PNS) aims to maximize afferent or efferent stimulation from the sacral plexus. BACKGROUND: We hypothesized this may be a promising new treatment for patients with bowel dysfunction in complete cauda equina syndrome (CES). METHODS: Thirteen patients with complete CES [8 constipation predominant (group 1) and 5 incontinence predominant (group 2)] had a 3-week trial of PNS. Patients who showed a 50% or more improvement in symptoms during the trial phase proceeded to permanent neurostimulator implantation. RESULTS: Five (63%) of the 8 patients in group 1 showed a 50% or more improvement in bowel symptoms during the trial phase and were permanently implanted. The mean Cleveland Clinic constipation score, sense of incomplete evacuation (%), and straining during defecation (%) improved from 17 ± 3.2 to 10 ± 4.5, 94 ± 18% to 30 ± 35%, and 81 ± 23% to 44 ± 38%, respectively. All 5 patients in group 2 showed a 50% or more reduction in incontinent episodes during the trial phase. The mean St Mark's score, ability to defer defecation, and the number of incontinent episodes per week improved from 18 ± 1.0 to 3.8 ± 2.5, 2.2 ± 1.8 to 11 ± 5.5 minutes, and 9.4 ± 10.7 to 0.4 ± 0.5 episodes, respectively, per week. During a median follow-up of 12 (10-22) months of permanent implantation, one patient lost efficacy at 6 months due to lead migration and another required removal and reimplantation of the neurostimulator due to wound infection. CONCLUSIONS: PNS is an effective treatment in the short term for bowel dysfunction in some patients with complete CES.
Subject(s)
Anal Canal/innervation , Constipation/therapy , Defecation/physiology , Electric Stimulation Therapy/methods , Fecal Incontinence/therapy , Polyradiculopathy/therapy , Anal Canal/physiopathology , Constipation/etiology , Constipation/physiopathology , Fecal Incontinence/etiology , Fecal Incontinence/physiopathology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Implantable Neurostimulators , Male , Middle Aged , Polyradiculopathy/complications , Polyradiculopathy/physiopathology , Pudendal Nerve , Quality of Life , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeSubject(s)
Foreign Bodies/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Tract , Magnets/toxicity , Female , Humans , MaleABSTRACT
Neurostimulation remains the mainstay of treatment for patients with faecal incontinence who fails to respond to available conservative measures. Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) is the main form of neurostimulation that is in use today. Posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS)--both the percutaneous and the transcutaneous routes--remains a relatively new entry in neurostimulation. Though in its infancy, PTNS holds promise to be an effective, patient friendly, safe and cheap treatment. However, presently PTNS only appears to have a minor role with SNS having the limelight in treating patients with faecal incontinence. This seems to have arisen as the strong, uniform and evidence based data on SNS remains to have been unchallenged yet by the weak, disjointed and unsupported evidence for both percutaneous and transcutaneous PTNS. The use of PTNS is slowly gaining acceptance. However, several questions remain unanswered in the delivery of PTNS. These have raised dilemmas which as long as they remain unsolved can considerably weaken the argument that PTNS could offer a viable alternative to SNS. This paper reviews available information on PTNS and focuses on these dilemmas in the light of existing evidence.
Subject(s)
Defecation , Fecal Incontinence/therapy , Intestines/innervation , Tibial Nerve/physiopathology , Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation , Fecal Incontinence/diagnosis , Fecal Incontinence/economics , Fecal Incontinence/physiopathology , Health Care Costs , Humans , Recovery of Function , Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation/adverse effects , Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation/economics , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Reports of magnet ingestion are increasing rapidly globally. However, multiple magnet ingestion, the subsequent potential complications and the importance of the early identification and proper management remain both under-recognized and underestimated. Published literature on such cases could possibly represent only the tip of an iceberg with press reports, web blogs and government documents highlighting further occurrence of many more such incidents. The increasing number of complications worldwide being reported secondary to magnet ingestion point not only to an acute lack of awareness about this condition among the medical profession but also among parents and carers who will be in most cases the first to pick up on magnet ingestion. There still seems to be no consensus on the management of magnet ingestion with several algorithms being proposed for management. Prevention of this condition remains a much better option than cure. Proper education and improved awareness among parents and carers and frontline medical staff is key in addressing this rapidly emerging problem. The goal of managing such cases of suspected magnet ingestion should be aimed at reducing delays between ingestion time, diagnosis time and intervention time.
