Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Analer Magnetsphinkter versus Artificial-Bowel-Sphinkter

Ein Vergleich von 2 Verfahren bei Stuhlinkontinenz

Magnetic anal sphincter versus artificial bowel sphincter

A comparison of 2 treatments for fecal incontinence

  • Journal Club
  • Published:
coloproctology Aims and scope

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  1. Halland M, Talley NJ (2012) Fecal incontinence: mechanisms and management. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 28:57–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lehur PA, McNevin S, Buntzen S et al (2010) Magnetic anal sphincter augmentation for the treatment of fecal incontinence: a preliminary report from a feasibility study. Dis Colon Rectum 53:1604–1610

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. End- und Dickdarmzentrum Münster, Warendorfer Str. 185, 48145, Münster, Deutschland

    F. Raulf

Authors
  1. F. Raulf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Raulf.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Raulf, F. Analer Magnetsphinkter versus Artificial-Bowel-Sphinkter. coloproctology 34, 153–154 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00053-012-0280-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00053-012-0280-x

Search

Navigation