PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

E Ganio

Publications and source records attributed to E Ganio.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Sacral nerve stimulation for treatment of fecal incontinence: a novel approach for intractable fecal incontinence.

PURPOSE: Many patients with fecal incontinence demonstrate a functional deficit of the internal anal sphincter or the external sphincter muscles without any apparent structural defects. Few patients are amenable to repair or substitution of the sphincter. However, sacral nerve stimulation appears to offer a valid treatment option for fecal incontinence. The objectives of this study were: to evaluate the efficacy of temporary stimulation of the sacral nerve roots (percutaneous nerve evaluation) in patients with functional fecal incontinence; to determine the mechanisms of possible improvement; and to evaluate if temporary stimulation could be reproduced and maintained by implanting a permanent neurostimulation system. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with fecal incontinence, 18 females and 5 males, median age of 54.9 years (range 28-71), underwent a percutaneous nerve evaluation test. Eleven patients (47.8 percent) also had urinary disorders: urge incontinence (4), stress incontinence (3), and retention (4). Associated disorders included perineal and rectal pain (1), spastic paraparesis (1), and syringomyelia (1). All patients underwent a preliminary evaluation using stationary anal manovolumetry, pudendal nerve terminal motor latency measurements, and anal ultrasound. A percutaneous electrode for the stimulation of the sacral nerve roots was positioned at the level of the third sacral foramen (S3) in 20 patients and S2 in 2 patients (1 patient missing). Stimulation parameters used were: pulse width 210 microsec, frequency 25 Hz, and average amplitude of 2.8 V (range 1-6). The electrode was left in place for a minimum of 7 days. Five patients were successively implanted with a permanent sacral electrode with a stimulation frequency of 16 to 18 Hz and amplitude of 1.1- 4.9 V. RESULTS: Seventeen of the 19 patients (89.4 percent) who completed the minimum percutaneous nerve evaluation period of 7 days (median 10.7 (range 7-30)), had a reduction of liquid or solid stool incontinence by more than 50 percent, and fourteen (73.6 percent) were completely continent for stool. The most important changes revealed by manovolumetry were an increase in resting pressure (P < 0.001) and voluntary contraction (P = 0.041), reduction of initial pressure for first sensation (P = 0.049) and urge to defecate (P = 0.002), and a reduction of the rectal volume for urge sensation (P = 0.006). The percutaneous nerve evaluation results were reproduced at a median follow-up of 19.2 months (range 5 to 37) in the 5 patients who received a permanent implant. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary stimulation of the sacral roots (percutaneous nerve evaluation) can be of help in those patients with fecal incontinence, and the results are reproduced with permanent implantation. The positive effect on continence seems to be derived from not only the direct efferent stimulation on the pelvic floor and the striated sphincter muscle, but also from modulating afferent stimulation of the autonomous neural system, inhibition of the rectal detrusor, activation of the internal anal sphincter, and modulation of sacral reflexes that regulate rectal sensitivity and motility.

Adult↗

Short-term sacral nerve stimulation for functional anorectal and urinary disturbances: results in 40 patients: evaluation of a new option for anorectal functional disorders.

PURPOSE: There are several options in the treatment of fecal incontinence; it is often difficult to choose the most appropriate, adequate treatment. The consolidated experience gained in the urologic field suggests that sacral nerve stimulation may be a further option in the choice of treatment. The aim of our study was to evaluate the preliminary results of the peripheral nerve evaluation test obtained in a multicenter collaborative study on patients with defecatory and urinary disturbances. METHODS: Forty patients (9 males; mean age, 50.2; range, 26-79 years) underwent the peripheral nerve evaluation test, 28 (70 percent) for fecal incontinence and 12 (30 percent) for chronic constipation. Fourteen (35 percent) patients also had urinary incontinence; six had urge incontinence, two had stress incontinence, and six had retention incontinence. Associated diseases were scleroderma (2 patients), spinal injuries (4 patients), and syringomyelia (1 patient). All the patients underwent preliminary investigations with anorectal manometry, pudendal nerve terminal motor latency testing, anal ultrasound, defecography, and if required, urodynamic tests. The electrode for sacral nerve stimulation was positioned percutaneously under local anesthesia in the S2 (4), S3 (34), or S4 (1) foramen unilaterally (1 patient not accounted for because of no response to acute test), based on the best motor and subjective responses of paresthesia of the pelvic floor. Stimulation parameters were average amplitude, 2.8 (range, 1-6) V and average frequency, 15 to 25 Hz. RESULTS: The mean duration of the tests was 9.9 (range, 7-30) days; tests lasting fewer than seven days were not evaluated. There were four early displacements of the electrode. In 22 of the 25 evaluable patients with fecal incontinence, there was an improvement of symptoms (88 percent), and 11 (44 percent) were completely continent to liquid or solid stools, whereas in 7 symptoms were unchanged. Mean number of episodes of liquid or solid stool incontinence per week was 8.1 (range, 4-18) in the prestimulation period and 1.7 (range, 0-12) during the peripheral nerve evaluation test. (P = 0.001; Wilcoxon's signed-rank test). The most important manometric findings were: increase of maximum rest pressure (39.4 +/- 7.3 vs. 54.3 +/- 8.5 mmHg; P = 0.014, Wilcoxon's test) and maximum squeeze pressure (84.7 +/- 8.8 vs. 99.5 +/- 1.1 mmHg; P = 0.047), reduction of initial threshold (63.6 +/- 5.2 vs. 42.4 +/- 4.7 ml; P = 0.041) and urge sensation (123.8 +/- 0.6 vs. 78.3 +/- 8.9 ml; P = 0.05). An improvement was also found in patients with constipation, with reduction in difficulty emptying the rectum, with prestimulation at 7 (range, 2-21) episodes per week and end of peripheral nerve evaluation test at 2.1 (range, 0-6) episodes per week, P < 0.01) and in the number of unsuccessful visits to the toilet, which dropped from 29.2 (7-24) to 6.7 (0-28) per week (P = 0.01). The most important manometric findings in constipated patients were an increase in amplitude of maximum squeeze pressure during sacral nerve stimulation (prestimulation, 63 +/- 0 mm Hg; end of peripheral nerve evaluation test, 78 +/- 1 mm Hg; P = 0.009) and a reduction in rectal volume for urge threshold (prestimulation, 189 +/- 52 ml; end of peripheral nerve evaluation test, 139 +/- 45 ml; P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: In functional bowel disorders short-term sacral nerve stimulation seems to be a useful diagnostic tool to assess patients for a minor invasive therapy alternative to conventional surgical procedure.

Adult↗

Neuromodulation for fecal incontinence: outcome in 16 patients with definitive implant. The initial Italian Sacral Neurostimulation Group (GINS) experience.

PURPOSE: Sacral nerve modulation appears to offer a valid treatment option for some patients with fecal incontinence and functional defects of the internal anal sphincter or of the striated muscle. METHODS: Sixteen patients with fecal incontinence (4 males; mean age, 51.4 (range, 27-79) years) with intact or surgically repaired (n = 1) anal sphincter underwent permanent sacral nerve stimulation implant. Cause was traumatic in two patients, and associated disorders included scleroderma (2 patients) and spastic paraparesis (1 patient); eight (50 percent) of the patients also had urinary incontinence, and two (12.5 percent) had nonobstructive urinary retention. All patients were selected on the basis of positive findings from at least one peripheral nerve evaluation. The stimulating electrode was positioned in the S2 (1 patient), S3 (14 patients), or S4 (1 patient) sacral foramen. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 15.5 (range, 3-45) months. Mean preimplant Williams score decreased from 4.1 +/- 0.9 (range, 2-5) to 1.25 +/- 0.5 (range, 1-2) (P = 0.01, Wilcoxon test), and the number of incontinence accidents for liquid or solid stool in 14 days decreased from 11.5 +/- 4.8 (range, 2-20) before implant to 0.6 +/- 0.9 (range, 0-2) at the last follow-up. Important manometric data were an increase in mean maximal pressure at rest of 37.7 +/- 14.9 mmHg (implantable pulse generator 49.1 +/- 18.7, P = 0.04) and in mean maximal pressure during squeeze (prestimulation 67.3 +/- 21.1 mmHg, implantable pulse generator 82.6 +/- 21.0, P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Neuromodulation can be considered an option for fecal incontinence. However, an accurate clinical and instrumental evaluation and careful patient selection are required to optimize outcome.

Adult↗

Which surgical approach for rectocele? A multicentric report from Italian coloproctologists.

The most effective surgical technique for rectocele has not yet been clearly established. A retrospective multicentric study was carried out to compare the long-term results of 3 endorectal techniques (Block, Sarles and stapled) and the perineal levatorplasty, alone and in association, in a series of patients with symptomatic rectocele. From January 1992 to December 1999, 2212 patients with defecation disorders were referred to 5 Italian coloproctology units. An anterior rectocele was clinically diagnosed in 1045 patients and confirmed with defecography. On the basis of clinical and radiological parameters, 317 patients (312 women; mean age, 52.4+/-20.1 years) were selected for surgery. Group 1 consisted of 141 patients (136 women; mean age, 50.4+/-18.8 years) who were submitted to endorectal operations. Group 2 consisted of 126 women (mean age, 52.5+/-19.7 years) who received perineal levatorplasty. Finally, 50 women (mean age, 54.3+/-21.9 years) in Group 3 received endorectal operations associated with perineal levatorplasty. A total of 269 patients were followed postoperatively (mean period, 24.2+/-3.1 months, 27.5+/-5.4 months and, 22.8+/-2.8 months, respectively) with the same questionnaire and clinical examination. Three months after surgery, a defecography examination and anorectal manometry were performed in 136 and 132 patients, respectively. Operative time, hospital stay and time to return to work were significantly higher in Group 3 (p<0.001). There was one death in Group 3 due to severe sepsis. Main postoperative complications were: in Group 1, hemorrhage (7.8%, all Sarles), dehiscence of the endorectal suture (5.0%, all Block), distal rectal stenosis (2.1%, 1 stapled, 2 block), and rectovaginal fistula (1.4%, all Sarles); in Group 2, delayed healing of the perineal wound (16.4%); in Group 3 delayed healing of the perineal wound (22.0%), hemorrhage (6%, all Sarles), dehiscence (4.0%), stenosis (2.0%). 17.3% of patients of Group 2 and 22.5% of Group 3 complained of dyspareunia. Postoperative defecography showed a complete absence of the rectocele in 44.1% of patients and reduction of size in the others, without significant differences among the three groups. Manometric pattern was not significantly modified by surgery. Significant symptoms recurred in 5.9% of the patients in Group 1, 6.4% in Group 2, and 5.0% in Group 3. Perineal levatorplasty did not significantly improve obstructed defecation, as it did not allow to excise the rectal mucosal prolapse, and was followed by an high incidence of delayed healing of the perineal wound and dyspareunia. Sarles procedure achieved better control of mucosal prolapse but carried a higher complication rate compared to the others. The association of the perineal levatorplasty with an endorectal technique required significantly longer operative time, and led to a longer hospital stay and time to return to work. In conclusion, the investigated techniques showed different patterns of postoperative complications: bleeding after Sarles, dehiscence after Block, dyspareunia after perineoplasty and fatal gangrene after stapled, but non of them showed a clear superiority over the others in term of clinical or functional results 2 years after surgery.

Adult↗

Prospective randomized multicentre trial comparing stapled with open haemorrhoidectomy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the results of conventional open haemorrhoidectomy as currently practised in Italy (group 1) with stapled haemorrhoidectomy using a 33-mm circular stapling device (group 2). METHODS: One hundred patients with symptomatic third- and fourth-degree haemorrhoids were enrolled by five hospitals. Patients were allocated to the two groups according to a centralized randomization scheme featuring five permutated blocks of 20. Preoperative clinical examination and anorectal manometry demonstrated no features of anal incontinence. Patients had a clinical and manometric re-evaluation after operation and were asked to complete a clinical diary. After a median of 16 (range 8-19) months patients were administered a standardized questionnaire by telephone. RESULTS: Postoperative bleeding requiring haemostatic procedures occurred in three patients in each group. Patients in group 1 complained of moderate pain for a median of 5.3 (range 0-19) days compared with 3.1 (range 0-10) days in group 2 (P = 0.01), while severe pain was present for 2.3 (range 0-24) days in group 1 but only for 1 (range 0-14) day in group 2 (P = 0.03). The median hospital stay was 2 days in group 1 compared with 1 day in group 2 (P = 0.01). In the early days after operation, patients in group 2 had greater difficulty in maintaining normal continence to liquid stools (P = 0.01), but after 30 days the continence score was better in group 2 (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Stapled haemorrhoidectomy is as effective as conventional haemorrhoidectomy. Reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay and a trend toward earlier return to work suggest short-term advantages for the stapled technique.

Adult↗

Oral versus combination mesalazine therapy in active ulcerative colitis: a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Oral and topical mesalazine formulations are effective in active ulcerative colitis, but little is known on the efficacy of combined treatment. AIM: To compare the efficacy of oral mesalazine vs. combined oral and topical mesalazine in mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: Patients with mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis (Clinical Activity Index, CAI 4-12) were identified at 15 participating centres. They were randomized to receive either mesalazine 4 g orally plus placebo enema, or mesalazine 2 g orally plus mesalazine 2 g rectally as a liquid enema for 6 weeks. The rate of clinical remission (CAI < 4) or clinical remission/improvement (reduction of CAI of 50% from baseline) at 6 weeks and time to clinical remission/improvement were primary end-points; the rate of endoscopic remission was a secondary end-point. RESULTS: 67 patients were assigned to oral treatment and 63 to combined treatment. One patient in the oral group and 2 in the combined group discontinued the treatment due to adverse events. Following an intention-to-treat analysis, the rate of clinical remission was 82% for oral treatment and 87% for combined treatment (P=0.56); the mean time to remission 22.2 and 20.2 days, respectively (P=0.29); the rate of clinical remission/improvement and the rate of endoscopic remission were 85% and 91% (P=0.503) and 58% and 71% (P=0.21), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mild active ulcerative colitis, mesalazine 4 g orally and 2 g orally plus 2 g enema are equally effective in inducing disease remission.

Administration, Oral↗

[Evaluation of the prognostic value of certain biological indices in acute pancreatitis].

After a review of the aetiological, clinical and diagnostic aspects of acute pancreatitis, personal experience is reported of the prognostic indications supplied by the analysis of certain simple haematic parameters. The reliability of the results is confirmed. This technique will be used in a personal diagnostic and therapeutic protocol as a means of early identification of patients at the greatest risk.

Acute Disease↗