5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of Faecal Incontinence—A UEG/ESCP/ESNM/ESPCG collaboration

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          The goal of this project was to create an up‐to‐date joint European clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of faecal incontinence (FI), using the best available evidence. These guidelines are intended to help guide all medical professionals treating adult patients with FI (e.g., general practitioners, surgeons, gastroenterologists, other healthcare workers) and any patients who are interested in information regarding the diagnosis and management of FI.

          Methods

          These guidelines have been created in cooperation with members from the United European Gastroenterology (UEG), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP), European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility (ESNM) and the European Society for Primary Care Gastroenterology (ESPCG). These members made up the guideline development group (GDG). Additionally, a patient advisory board (PAB) was created to reflect and comment on the draft guidelines from a patient perspective. Relevant review questions were established by the GDG along with a set of outcomes most important for decision making. A systematic literature search was performed using these review questions and outcomes as a framework. For each predefined review question, the study or studies with the highest level of study design were included. If evidence of a higher‐level study design was available, no lower level of evidence was sought or included. Data from the studies were extracted by two reviewers for each predefined important outcome within each review question. Where possible, forest plots were created. After summarising the results for each review question, a systematic quality assessment using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) approach was performed. For each review question, we assessed the quality of evidence for every predetermined important outcome. After evidence review and quality assessment were completed, recommendations could be formulated. The wording used for each recommendation was dependent on the level of quality of evidence. Lower levels of evidence resulted in weaker recommendations and higher levels of evidence resulted in stronger recommendations. Recommendations were discussed within the GDG to reach consensus.

          Results

          These guidelines contain 45 recommendations on the classification, diagnosis and management of FI in adult patients.

          Conclusion

          These multidisciplinary European guidelines provide an up‐to‐date comprehensive evidence‐based framework with recommendations on the diagnosis and management of adult patients who suffer from FI.

          Abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references134

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

          Users of clinical practice guidelines and other recommendations need to know how much confidence they can place in the recommendations. Systematic and explicit methods of making judgments can reduce errors and improve communication. We have developed a system for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations that can be applied across a wide range of interventions and contexts. In this article we present a summary of our approach from the perspective of a guideline user. Judgments about the strength of a recommendation require consideration of the balance between benefits and harms, the quality of the evidence, translation of the evidence into specific circumstances, and the certainty of the baseline risk. It is also important to consider costs (resource utilisation) before making a recommendation. Inconsistencies among systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations reduce their potential to facilitate critical appraisal and improve communication of these judgments. Our system for guiding these complex judgments balances the need for simplicity with the need for full and transparent consideration of all important issues.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Determinates of muscle precursor cell therapy efficacy in a nonhuman primate model of intrinsic urinary sphincter deficiency

            Background Cell therapy for intrinsic urinary sphincter deficiency (ISD) in women has been moderately effective, and improvements are needed. To improve treatment efficacy, it is important to better understand determinates of cell efficacy in the different patient cohorts. We have reported that in nonhuman primates the chronicity of ISD may affect cell efficacy, but additional factors (age, psychosocial stress, hormone status, body weight) can be associated with many disease/treatment outcomes in women – and these factors are the focus of this study. Methods Adult female cynomolgus monkeys were divided into groups: (1) younger (n = 10, 5–8 years of age) versus older (n = 10, 13–18 years of age); (2) age-matched/socially subordinate (n = 15) versus socially dominant (n = 15); and (3) age-matched lower body weight (n = 6) versus higher body weight (n = 6). Autologous skeletal muscle precursor cells (skMPCs, 5 million) were injected into the urinary sphincter 6 weeks after a surgically induced ISD procedure. Resting and pudendal nerve-stimulated maximal urethral pressures (MUP) were measured before, and 3 and 6 months post-skMPC treatment and urinary sphincter muscle/collagen content within the sphincter complex was measured by quantitative histology 6 months posttreatment. Results Efficacy of skMPCs on MUP and sphincter muscle/collagen ratios are affected by age (average 40% reduction in efficacy, p < 0.05 vs. younger NHPs), social stress (average 30% reduction in efficacy, p < 0.05 vs. socially dominant) and body weight/fasting glucose concentrations (average 35% reduction in efficacy, p < 0.05 vs. lower body weight). Conclusion Multiple factors (age, stress-induced dysmenorrhea, and body weight) affect the efficacy of cell therapy to restore structure and function in the urinary sphincter complex in NHPs with ISD. Consideration of, and alternatives for, these patient cohorts should be considered.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Anorectal Disorders

              This report defines criteria and reviews the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of the following common anorectal disorders: fecal incontinence (FI), functional anorectal pain, and functional defecation disorders. FI is defined as the recurrent uncontrolled passage of fecal material for at least 3 months. The clinical features of FI are useful for guiding diagnostic testing and therapy. Anorectal manometry and imaging are useful for evaluating anal and pelvic floor structure and function. Education, antidiarrheals, and biofeedback therapy are the mainstay of management; surgery may be useful in refractory cases. Functional anorectal pain syndromes are defined by clinical features and categorized into 3 subtypes. In proctalgia fugax, the pain is typically fleeting and lasts for seconds to minutes. In levator ani syndrome and unspecified anorectal pain, the pain lasts more than 30 minutes, but in levator ani syndrome there is puborectalis tenderness. Functional defecation disorders are defined by ≥2 symptoms of chronic constipation or irritable bowel syndrome with constipation, and with ≥2 features of impaired evacuation, that is, abnormal evacuation pattern on manometry, abnormal balloon expulsion test, or impaired rectal evacuation by imaging. It includes 2 subtypes: dyssynergic defecation and inadequate defecatory propulsion. Pelvic floor biofeedback therapy is effective for treating levator ani syndrome and defecatory disorders.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                s.assmann@maastrichtuniversity.nl
                Journal
                United European Gastroenterol J
                United European Gastroenterol J
                10.1002/(ISSN)2050-6414
                UEG2
                United European Gastroenterology Journal
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2050-6406
                2050-6414
                18 March 2022
                April 2022
                : 10
                : 3 ( doiID: 10.1002/ueg2.v10.3 )
                : 251-286
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Surgery and Colorectal Surgery Maastricht University Medical Centre Maastricht The Netherlands
                [ 2 ] Division of Gastroenterology‐Hepatology Department of Internal Medicine Maastricht University Medical Centre Maastricht The Netherlands
                [ 3 ] School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism (NUTRIM) Maastricht University Maastricht The Netherlands
                [ 4 ] School for Oncology and Developmental Biology (GROW) Maastricht University Maastricht The Netherlands
                [ 5 ] 4rth TOMY – Academic Primary Care Unit Clinic of Social and Family Medicine University of Crete Heraklion Greece
                [ 6 ] Community Gastroenterology Specialist Nurse Royal Free Hospital London England UK
                [ 7 ] Mater Misericordiae University Hospital Dublin 7 Ireland
                [ 8 ] Surgical Professorial Unit Department of Colorectal Surgery St Vincent's University Hospital Dublin Ireland
                [ 9 ] Division of Gastroenterology of the University of Verona AOUI Verona Verona Italy
                [ 10 ] Center for Functional GI and Motility Disorders University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill North Carolina USA
                [ 11 ] Maastricht University Maastricht The Netherlands
                [ 12 ] The University of Adelaide Adelaide Medical School Faculty of Health & Medical Sciences Adelaide Australia
                [ 13 ] Department of Surgery and Colorectal Surgery Western General Hospital Edinburgh UK
                [ 14 ] Tor Vergata University of Rome Rome Italy
                [ 15 ] Department of General Practice Care and Public Health Research Institute Maastricht University Maastricht The Netherlands
                [ 16 ] Charles University Hospital Hradec Kralove Czech Republic
                [ 17 ] Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology University Hospital Zurich Zurich Switzerland
                [ 18 ] Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery University Hospital of North Norway Tromsø Norway
                [ 19 ] Patient Advisory Board Representative Maastricht The Netherlands
                [ 20 ] Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Incontinence and Pelvic Floor Health Tromsø Norway
                [ 21 ] Medical Academy Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Clinic of Surgery Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kauno Klinikos Kaunas Lithuania
                [ 22 ] St Mark's Hospital The National Bowel Hospital London UK
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Sadé L. Assmann, Department of Surgery and Colorectal Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

                Email: s.assmann@ 123456maastrichtuniversity.nl

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8740-7916
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9856-9980
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9467-9223
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9183-4750
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8412-9570
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4081-4741
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8780-476X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5445-4011
                Article
                UEG212213
                10.1002/ueg2.12213
                9004250
                35303758
                652ba8cf-2771-47a8-b2f3-2356f97951b9
                © 2022 The Authors. United European Gastroenterology Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of United European Gastroenterology.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 03 June 2021
                : 02 February 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 25, Tables: 1, Pages: 36, Words: 22572
                Funding
                Funded by: United European Gastroenterology , doi 10.13039/501100012355;
                Funded by: European Society of Coloproctology , doi 10.13039/100014231;
                Categories
                Original Article
                Luminal
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                April 2022
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.1.4 mode:remove_FC converted:12.04.2022

                clinical guidelines,diagnosis,faecal incontinence,fecal incontinence,grade,guidelines,ptns,treatment,sacral neuromodulation,unwanted loss of feces

                Comments

                Comment on this article