%0 Generic %A Lal, Nikhil %A Simillis, Constantinos %A Slesser, Alistair %A Kontovounisios, Christos %A Rasheed, Shahnawaz %A Tekkis, Paris P. %A Tan, Emile %D 2019 %T A systematic review of the literature reporting on randomised controlled trials comparing treatments for faecal incontinence in adults %U https://tandf.figshare.com/articles/dataset/A_systematic_review_of_the_literature_reporting_on_randomised_controlled_trials_comparing_treatments_for_faecal_incontinence_in_adults/7588394 %R 10.6084/m9.figshare.7588394.v1 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090192 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090195 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090198 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090201 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090204 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090207 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090210 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090213 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090216 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090219 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090222 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090225 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090228 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090231 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090234 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090237 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090240 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090243 %2 https://tandf.figshare.com/ndownloader/files/14090246 %K Faecal incontinence %K treatment %K systematic review %X

Aim: To perform a review of the literature reporting on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatments for faecal incontinence (FI) in adults.

Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Cochrane was performed in order to identify RCTs reporting on treatments for FI.

Results: The review included 60 RCTs reporting on 4838 patients with a mean age ranging from 36.8 to 88 years. From the included RCTs, 32 did not identify a significant difference between the treatments compared. Contradictory results were identified in RCTs comparing percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation and transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation versus sham stimulation, biofeedback-pelvic floor muscle training (BF-PFMT) versus PFMT, and between bulking agents such as PTQTM versus Durasphere®. In two separate RCTs, combination treatment of amplitude-modulated medium frequency stimulation and electromyography-biofeedback (EMG-BF), was noted to be superior to EMG-BF and low-frequency electrical stimulation alone. Combination of non-surgical treatments such as BF with sphincteroplasty significantly improved continence scores compared to sphincteroplasty alone. Surgical treatments were associated with higher rates of serious adverse events compared to non-surgical interventions.

Conclusions: The current evidence has not identified significant differences between treatments for FI, and where differences were identified, the results were contradictory between RCTs.

%I Taylor & Francis