Skip to main content
Log in

Fecal incontinence: Indications for repairing the anal sphincter

  • World Progress In Surgery
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Incontinent patients should be comprehensively investigated by objective tests, especially manometry, continence tests, and electromyography. Manometry can be used to predict the functional outcome and to calibrate the sphincter repair. Pure anatomical defects of the anal and pelvic musculature deserve surgical correction with or without overlapping the muscle ends. If the repair is delayed it should be done after a 3 month interval. A protective colostomy has to be performed in complex cases and in cases with septic complications. Before closing the colostomy, the ano-rectal function should be assessed. Acceptable continence can be restored in the majority of the patients, the outcome depending on the extent of local defects and the severity of concomitant pelvic floor neuropathy. Skeletal muscle transposition remains an esoteric approach to be used only in selected patients; the implantation of a neuromuscular stimulator seems to be warranted. In the presence of important functional deficits, sphincter repair may create a situation where additional conservative measures become more effective. A post-anal repair may be considered 3–12 months after rectopexy or sphincter repair. Incontinence based on pure functional defects is initially treated conservatively. A post-anal repair may improve the situation in two thirds of the patients but fails to help those who need it most. Failure seems to be related to a continuing neuropathic process. A peri-anal prosthetic band implant may be a valuable alternative in such patients. A sigmoidostomy is a measure of last resort. The prevention of fecal incontinence is most important and concerns surgeons, obstetricians, and physicians.

Résumé

L'exploration de l'incontinence anale doit comporter de nombreux examens objectifs et notamment la manométrie, les tests de continence, et l'électromyographie. La manométrie sert à prédire l'avenir fonctionnel et à calibrer la réparation sphinctérienne. Les défects anatomiques purs de la musculature anale et pelvienne méritent une correction chirurgicale avec ou sans suture en paletot des extrémités musculaires. Pour les réparations en deux temps, l'intervalle séparant les deux étapes devrait être au moins de trois mois. Il faut fabriquer une colostomie de protection dans certains cas complexes et en cas de complication septique. Avant de proposer la fermeture de la colostomie, il faut ré-évaluer la fonction ano-rectale. On arrive à restaurer une continence acceptable chez la plupart des patients, le résultat définitif dépendant surtout de l'importance du défect local et de la sévérité de la neuropathie associée du plancher pelvien. La transposition d'un muscle squelettique reste une méthode esotérique, à n'utiliser que chez certains patients bien sélectionnés; l'implantation d'un stimulateur neuromusculaire paraît justifiée. En présence d'anomalies fonctionnelles sphinctériennes importantes, d'autres méthodes conservatrices sont plus efficaces. Une réparation post-anale est à envisager 3 à 12 mois apès une rectopexie ou une reconstruction sphinctérienne. L'incontinence, basée sur des données purement fonctionnelles, doit être traitée d'abord par des méthodes conservatrices. Une réparation post-anale peut améliorer la situation chez deux-tiers des patients, mais généralement ne réussit pas chez les patients qui en ont le plus besoin. Les échecs sont surtout en rapport avec la continuation du processus neuropathique. L'implantation d'une prothèse péri-anale est une alternative valable dans de tels cas. La sigmoidostomie est une solution radicale de dernier ressort. La prévention de l'incontinence fécale est le facteur le plus important et concerne tous les chirurgiens, obstétriciens et médecins.

Resumen

Los pacientes incontinentes deben ser investigados en forma comprensiva mediante pruebas objetivas, especialmente la mamometría, los examenes de continencia y la electromiografía. La mamometría es de utilidad en la predicción del resultado funcional y en la calibración de una reparación del esfínter. Los defectos anatómicos puros de la musculatura anal y pélvica merecen corrección quirúrgica con y sin superposición de los cabos de los músculos. Si se decide posponer la reparación, ésta debe entonces hacerse luego de un intervalo de tres meses. En los casos complejos y en aquellos con complicaciones sépticas se debe construir una colostomía protectora; en tales pacientes se debe valorar la función ano-rectal antes de proceder con el cierre de la colostomía. Se puede restaurar continencia de grado aceptable en la mayoría de los pacientes, peroel resultado depende de la magnitud de los defectos locales y de la gravedad de la neuropatía concomitante del piso pélvico. La transposición del músculo esquelético sigue representando un aproche esotérico que debe ser usado solamente en pacientes seleccionados; parece justificada la implantación de un estimulador neuromuscular. En presencia de déficits funcionales importantes la reparación del esfínter puede dar lugar a una situación en la cual medidas conservadoras adicionales resultan más efectivas. Una reparación post-anal puede ser considerada 3–12 meses después de une rectopexia o de una reparación del esfínter. La incontinencia por defectos funcionales puros es tratada en forma conservadora en un principio. Una reparación post-anal puede mejorar la situación en dos tercios de los pacientes, pero falla en los pacientes que más la necesitan. La falla parece estar relacionada con el proceso neuropático continuado. Una alternativa válida puede ser el implante de una banda perianal protésica. La sigmoidostomía es un procedimiento que sólo debe ser emprendido en última instancia. La prevención de la incontinencia fecal es de la mayor importancia y concierne a los cirujanos, obstetras e internistas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Penninckx, F.M., Elliot, M.S., Hancke, E., Henry, M.M., Kodner, I.J., Kuypers, J.H.C., Pemberton, J.H., Schuster, M.M.: Symposium on faecal incontinence. Int. J. Colorect. Dis.2:173, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  2. Read, N.W., Haynes, W.G., Bartolo, D.C.C., Hall, J., Read, M.G., Donelly, T.C., Johnson, A.G.: Use of anorectal manometry during rectal infusion of saline to investigate sphincter function in incontinent patients. Gastroenterology85:105, 1983

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Penninckx, F.M., Lestar, B., Kerremans, R.P.: A new balloon-retaining test for evaluation of anorectal function in incontinent patients. Dis. Colon Rectum32:202, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Perry, R.E., Blatchford, G.J., Christensen, M.A., Thorsen, A.G., Attwood, S.E.: Manometric diagnosis of anal sphincter injuries. Am. J. Surg.159:112, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Helzel, M.V.: Doppelbelichlungs Defäkographie nach perinealer Sphinkterplastik. ROFO149:629, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Snooks, S.J., Henry, M.M., Swash, M.: Faecal incontinence due to external anal sphincter division in childbirth is associated with damage to the innervation of the pelvic floor musculature: A double pathology. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.92:824, 1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Laurberg, S., Swash, M., Henry, M.M.: Delayed external sphincter repair for obstetric tear. Br. J. Surg.75:786, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Law, P.J., Kamm, M.A., Bartram, C.I.: A comparison between electromyography and anal endosonography in mapping external sphincter defects. Dis. Colon Rectum33:370, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fisher, S.E., Breckon, K., Andrews, H.A., Keighley, M.R.: Psychiatric screening for patients with faecal incontinence or chronic constipation referred for surgical treatment. Br. J. Surg.76:352, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Parks, A.G., McPartlin, J.F.: Surgical repair of anal sphincters following injury. In Operative Surgery: Colon, Rectum and Anus, Ch. Rob, R. Smith, I. Todd, editors, London, Butterworths, 1977, pp. 245–248

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pezim, M.E., Spencer, R.J., Stanhope, C.R., Beart, R.W. Jr., Ready, R.L., Ilstrup, D.M.: Sphincter repair for fecal incontinence after obstetrical or iatrogenic injury. Dis. Colon Rectum30:521, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Abcarian, H., Orsay, C.P., Pearl, R.K., Nelson, R.L., Briley, S.C.: Traumatic cloaca. Dis. Colon Rectum32:783, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Miller, R., Orrom, W.J., Cornes, H., Duthie, G., Bartolo, D.C.: Anterior sphincter plication and levatorplasty in the treatment of faecal incontinence. Br. J. Surg.76:1058, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Browning, G.G., Motson, R.W.: Anal sphincter injury: Management and results of Parks sphincter repair. Ann. Surg.199:351, 1984

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ctercteko, G.C., Fazio, V.W., Jagelman, D.G., Lavery, I.C., Weakley, F.L., Melia, M.: Anal sphincter repair: A report of 60 cases and review of the literature. Aust. N. Z. J. Surg.58:703, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Haadem, K., Ohrlander, S., Lingman, G.: Long-term ailments due to anal sphincter rupture caused by delivery: A hidden problem. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol.27:27, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Browning, G.G., Motson, R.W.: Results of Parks operation for faecal incontinence after and sphincter injury. Br. Med. J. Clin. Res.286:1873, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jacobs, P.P.M., Scheuer, M., Kuypers, J.H.C., Vingerhoets, M.H.: Obstetric fecal incontinence: Role of pelvic floor denervation and results of delayed sphincter repair. Dis. Colon Rectum33:494, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Yoshioka, K., Keighley, M.R.: Sphincter repair for fecal incontinence. Dis. Colon Rectum32:39, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Haadem, K., Dahlstrom, J.A., Lingman, G.: Anal sphincter function after delivery: A prospective study in women with sphincter rupture and controls. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol.35:7, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Browning, G.G., Henry, M.M., Motson, R.W.: Combined sphincter repair and postanal repair for the treatment of complicated injuries to the anal sphincters. Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl.70:324, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Corman, M.L.: Colon and rectal surgery, 2nd edition, Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Co., 1989, pp. 171–207

    Google Scholar 

  23. Pickrell, K.L.: Gracilis muscle transplant for the correction of neurogenic rectal incontinence. Surg. Clin. North Am.39:1405, 1959

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Corman, M.L.: Gracilis muscle transposition for anal incontinence: Late results. Br. J. Surg.72:S21, 1985

  25. Leguit, P. Jr, van Baal, J.G., Brummelkamp, W.H.: Gracilis muscle transposition in the treatment of fecal incontinence: Long-term follow-up and evaluation of anal pressure recordings. Dis. Colon Rectum28:1, 1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Corman, M.L.: Follow-up evaluation of gracilis muscle transposition for fecal incontinence. Dis. Colon Rectum23:552, 1980

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Stelzer, F.: Komplexe Traumen des Perineums, speziell des anorectalen Kontinenzorgans. Erfahrungen und Ergebnisse bei 27 Patienten von 1956–1988. Langenbecks Arch. Chir.375:55, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Baeten, C., Spaans, F., Fluks, A.: An implanted neuromuscular stimulator for fecal continence following previously implanted gracilis muscle: Report of a case. Dis. Colon Rectum31:134, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Prochiantz, A., Gross, P.: Gluteal myoplasty for sphincter replacement: Principles, results and prospects. J. Pediatr. Surg.17:25, 1982

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Skef, Z., Radhakrishnan, J., Reyes, H.M.: Anorectal continence following sphincter reconstruction utilizing the gluteus maximus muscle: A case report. J. Pediatr. Surg.18:779, 1983

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Iwai, N., Kaneda, H., Tsuto, T., Yanagihara, J., Takahashi, T.: Objective assessment of anorectal function after sphincter reconstruction using the gluteus maximus muscle: Report of a case. Dis. Colon Rectum28:973, 1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Parks, A.G.: Postanal pelvic floor repair (and the treatment of anorectal incontinence). In Operative Surgery: Colon, Rectum and Anus, Ch. Rob, R. Smith, I. Todd, editors, London, Butterworths, 1977, pp. 249–254

    Google Scholar 

  33. Broden, G., Dolk, A., Holmstrom, B.: Recovery of the internal anal sphincter following rectopexy: A possible explanation for continence improvement. Int. J. Colorect. Dis.3:23, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  34. Browning, G.G., Parks, A.G.: Postanal repair for neuropathic faecal incontinence: Correlation of clinical result and anal canal pressures. Br. J. Surg.70:101, 1983

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Keighley, M.R., Fielding, W.: Management of faecal incontinence and results of surgical treatment. Br. J. Surg.70:463, 1983

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Miller, R., Bartolo, D.C., Locke Edmunds, J.C., Mortensen, N.J.: Prospective study of conservative and operative treatment of faecal incontinence. Br. J. Surg.75:101, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Snooks, S.J., Swash, M., Henry, M.: Electrophysiologic and manometic assessment of failed postanal repair for anorectal incontinence. Dis. Colon Rectum27:733, 1984

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Womack, N.R., Morrison, J.F., Williams, N.S.: Prospective study of the effects of postanal repair in neurogenic faecal incontinence. Br. J. Surg.75:48, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yoshioka, K., Hyland, G., Keighley, M.R.: Physiological changes after postanal repair and parameters predicting outcome. Br. J. Surg.75:1220, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Scott, A.D.N., Henry, M.M., Philips, R.K.S.: Clinical assessment and anorectal manometry before postanal repair: Failure to predict outcome. Br. J. Surg.77:628, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Yoshioka, K., Keighley, M.R.: Critical assessment of the quality of continence after postanal repair for faecal incontinence. Br. J. Surg.76:1054, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Scheuer, M., Kuijpers, H.C., Jacobs, P.P.: Postanal repair restores anatomy rather than function. Dis. Colon Rectum32:960, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Christiansen, J., Skomorowska, E.: Persisting incontinence after postanal repair treated by anterior perineoplasty. Int. J. Colorect. Dis.2:9, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  44. Larach, S.W., Vazquez, B.: Modified Thiersch procedure with silastic mesh implant: A simple solution for fecal incontinence and severe prolapse. South. Med. J.79:307, 1986

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Stricker, J.W., Schoetz, D.J. Jr., Coller, J.A., Veidenheimer, M.C.: Surgical correction of anal incontinence. Dis. Colon Rectum31:533, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Yoshioka, K., Keighley, M.R.: Clinical and manometric assessment of gracilis muscle transplant for fecal incontinence. Dis. Colon Rectum31:767, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Snooks, S.J., Swash, M., Henry, M.M., Setchell, M.: Risk factors in childbirth causing damage to the pelvic floor innervation. Int. J. Colorect. Dis.1:20, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  48. Schmidt, R.A., Kogan, B.A., Tanagho, E.A.: Neuroprosthesis in the management of incontinence in myelomeningocele patients. J. Urol.143:779, 1990

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ryan, P., Fink, R.: New rectum and new anal canal: Two cases of ileal reservoir-cutaneous anastomosis. Aust. N. Z. J. Surg.58:161, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ge, L.Z.: Anal sphincter reconstruction by interposition of an ileo-colonic segment and transposition of musculi glutaeus maximus bundles after resection of anorectal carcinoma. Chung. Hua. Wai. Ko. Tsa. Chih.27:387, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Williams, N.S., Hallan, R.I., Koeze, T.H., Watkins, E.S.: Construction of a neorectum and neoanal sphincter following previous proctocolectomy. Br. J. Surg.76:1191, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Willital, G.H., Meier, H.: Der kunstliche Enddarmverschluss, ein neues Konzept in der Behandlung der analen Inkontinenz. 5-Jahres-Ergebnisse. Med. Welt33:1226, 1982

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Fedorov, V.D., Shelygin, Y.A.: Treatment of patients with rectal cancer. Dis. Colon Rectum32:138, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Christiansen, J., Lorentzen, M.: Implantation of artificial sphincter for anal incontinence: Report of five cases. Dis. Colon Rectum32:432, 1989

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Fazio, V.W.: Complex anal fistulae. Gastroenterol. Clin. North Am.16:93, 1987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Thomson, J.P., Ross, A.H.: Can the external anal sphincter be preserved in the treatment of trans-sphincteric fistula-in-ano? Int. J. Colorect. Dis.4:247, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  57. Cornes, H., Bartolo, D.C.C.: Effect of vaginal delivery on anal canal sensation. Br. J. Surg.77:A699, 1990

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Penninckx, F. Fecal incontinence: Indications for repairing the anal sphincter. World J. Surg. 16, 820–825 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02066976

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02066976

Keywords

Navigation