Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Jul;47(7):1158-62; discussion 1162-3.
doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-0553-8. Epub 2004 May 6.

Sacral nerve stimulation in fecal incontinence

Affiliations

Sacral nerve stimulation in fecal incontinence

Ole O Rasmussen et al. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004 Jul.

Abstract

Purpose: The effect of sacral nerve stimulation was studied in 45 patients with fecal incontinence.

Methods: All patients were initially tested in general anesthesia. Sacral nerves 2, 3, and 4 were tested on both sides. If a perineal/perianal muscular response to sacral nerve stimulation could be obtained, electrodes were implanted for a three-week test-stimulation period. If sacral nerve stimulation resulted in at least a 50 percent reduction in incontinence episodes during the test period, a system for permanent sacral nerve stimulation was implanted.

Results: When tested in general anesthesia, 43 of 45 patients had a muscular response to sacral nerve stimulation and had electrodes implanted for the three-week test period. Percutaneous electrodes were used in 34 patients, and 23 of these had at least a 50 percent reduction in incontinence episodes, whereas the electrodes dislocated in 7 patients and 4 had a poor response. Permanent electrodes with percutaneous extension electrodes were used primarily in 9 patients and after dislocation of percutaneous electrodes in an additional 6 patients; 14 of these had a good result. In the last patient, no clinical response to stimulation with the permanent electrode could be obtained. A permanent stimulation system was implanted in 37 patients. After a median of six (range, 0-36) months follow-up, five patients had the system explanted: three because the clinical response faded out, and two because of infection. Incontinence score (Wexner, 0-20) for the 37 patients with a permanent system for sacral nerve stimulation was reduced from median 16 (range, 9-20) before sacral nerve stimulation to median 6 (range, 0-20) at latest follow-up ( P < 0.0001). There was no differences in effect of sacral nerve stimulation in patients with idiopathic incontinence (n = 19) compared with spinal etiology (n = 8) or obstetric cause of incontinence (n = 5). Sacral nerve stimulation did not influence anal pressures or rectal volume tolerability.

Conclusions: Sacral nerve stimulation in fecal incontinence shows promising results. Patients with idiopathic, spinal etiology, or persisting incontinence after sphincter repair may benefit from this minimally invasive treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources