Skip to main content
Log in

Long-Term Efficacy of Dynamic Graciloplasty for Fecal Incontinence

  • Original Contribution
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

PURPOSE: Patients with end-stage fecal incontinence in whom all standard medical and surgical treatment has failed or is not expected to be effective can be treated by dynamic graciloplasty. The aim of this study was to review the long-term efficacy data. METHODS: Success was defined as a greater than 50 percent decrease in the frequency of incontinent episodes. Measured physiologic parameters included enema retention time and the difference in resting and squeezing pressures with and without stimulation. Measured quality-of-life parameters included the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 Health Status Questionnaire, a Fecal Incontinence TyPE Specification, the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale, the “state” portion of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, and the Visual Analog Scale, which were administered at baseline and through follow-up. Independent monitors collected data as part of a multicenter trial for patients who underwent dynamic graciloplasty from May 1993 to November 1999. RESULTS: There were 129 patients entered in the study, 115 of whom met eligibility criteria and were included in the efficacy outcome analysis. Twenty-seven patients entered the study with a preexisting functioning stoma; the remaining 88 patients did not have a functioning stoma at the time of enrollment. Success was achieved in 62 percent of nonstoma patients at 12 months; these results were sustained at 18-month and 24-month follow-up assessments (55 and 56 percent, respectively). The success rate in the stoma patients increased from 37.5 percent (9 of 24 patients) at 12 months to 62 percent (13 of 21 patients) at 18 months and was 43 percent at 24 months (9 of 21 patients), which reflects the increased number of patients whose stomas were closed. Although the measured physiologic continence parameters generally improved, these changes did not correlate with continence outcome. The group of patients (stoma and nonstoma) who underwent dynamic graciloplasty showed statistically significant improvements in quality of life as measured by Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 physical function (P = 0.006) and social functioning (P = 0.02) assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic graciloplasty was successful in the majority of patients with end-stage fecal incontinence. This result was usually achieved by 12 months after surgery in patients who did not have stomas and by 18 months in patients who had stomas at the time of dynamic graciloplasty surgery. These various improvements conferred by dynamic graciloplasty persisted during the two-year follow-up.

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. JF Johanson J Lafferty (1996) ArticleTitleEpidemiology of fecal incontinence Am J Gastroenterol 91 33–36

    Google Scholar 

  2. DA Drossman L Zhming E Andruzzi et al. (1993) ArticleTitleUS householder survey of functional gastrointestinal disorders Dig Dis Sci 38 1569–1580

    Google Scholar 

  3. D Kumar R Hutchinson E Grant (1995) ArticleTitleBilateral gracilis neosphincter construction for treatment of fecal incontinence Br J Surg 82 1645–1647

    Google Scholar 

  4. AJ Eccersley PJ Lunniss NS Williams (1999) ArticleTitleUnstimulated graciloplasty in traumatic fecal incontinence Br J Surg 86 1071–1072

    Google Scholar 

  5. JM Devesa JM Fernandez Madrid BR Rodriquez Gallego E Vicente J Nuno JM Enriquez (1997) ArticleTitleBilateral gluteoplasty for fecal incontinence Dis Colon Rectum 40 883–888

    Google Scholar 

  6. RK Pearl ML Prasad RL Nelson CP Orsay H Abcarian (1991) ArticleTitleBilateral gluteus maximus transposition for anal incontinence Dis Colon Rectum 34 478–481

    Google Scholar 

  7. WD Wong LL Jensen DC Bartolo DA Rothenberger (1996) ArticleTitleArtificial anal sphincter Dis Colon Rectum 39 1345–1351

    Google Scholar 

  8. J Christiansen OO Rasmussen K Lindorff-Larsen (1999) ArticleTitleLong-term results of artificial anal sphincter implantation for severe anal incontinence Ann Surg 230 45–48

    Google Scholar 

  9. PE O’Brien S Skinner (2000) ArticleTitleRestoring control Dis Colon Rectum 43 1213–1216

    Google Scholar 

  10. RD Madoff CG Baeten J Christiansen et al. (2000) ArticleTitleStandards for anal sphincter replacement Dis Colon Rectum 43 135–141

    Google Scholar 

  11. RD Madoff HR Rosen CG Baeten et al. (1999) ArticleTitleSafety and efficacy of dynamic muscle plasty for anal incontinence Gastroenterology 116 549–556

    Google Scholar 

  12. CG Baeten (2000) ArticleTitleSafety and efficacy of dynamic graciloplasty for fecal incontinence Dis Colon Rectum 43 743–751

    Google Scholar 

  13. SD Wexner A Gonzalez-Padron J Rius et al. (1996) ArticleTitleStimulated gracilis neosphincter operation Dis Colon Rectum 39 957–964

    Google Scholar 

  14. CG Baeten J Konsten F Spaans et al. (1991) ArticleTitleDynamic graciloplasty for treatment of fecal incontinence Lancet 338 1163–1165

    Google Scholar 

  15. SD Wexner A Gonzalez-Padron TA Teoh et al. (1996) ArticleTitleThe stimulated gracilis neosphincter for fecal incontinence Plastic Reconstr Surg 98 693–699

    Google Scholar 

  16. BP Geerdes E Heineman J Konsten PB Soeters CG Baeten (1996) ArticleTitleDynamic graciloplasty Dis Colon Rectum 39 912–917

    Google Scholar 

  17. S Korsgen MR Keighley (1995) ArticleTitleStimulated gracilis neosphincter: not as good as previously thought. Report of four cases Dis Colon Rectum 38 1331–1333

    Google Scholar 

  18. CG Baeten BP Geerdes EM Adang et al. (1995) ArticleTitleAnal dynamic graciloplasty in the treatment of intractable fecal incontinence N Engl J Med 332 1600–1605

    Google Scholar 

  19. NS Williams J Patel BD George RI Hallan ES Watkins (1991) ArticleTitleDevelopment of an electrically stimulated neoanal sphincter Lancet 338 1166–1169

    Google Scholar 

  20. C Mavrantonis SD Wexner (1999) ArticleTitleStimulated graciloplasty for treatment of intractable fecal incontinence Dis Colon Rectum 42 497–504

    Google Scholar 

  21. I Sielezneff AJ Malouf DC Bartolo A Pryde S Douglas (1999) ArticleTitleDynamic graciloplasty in the treatment of patients with fecal incontinence Br J Surg 86 61–65

    Google Scholar 

  22. K Matzel R Madoff L LaFontaine et al. (2000) ArticleTitleComplications of dynamic graciloplasty Dis Colon Rectum 43 13–65

    Google Scholar 

  23. J Konsten CG Baeten F Spaans MG Havenith PB Soeters (1993) ArticleTitleFollow-up of anal dynamic graciloplasty for fecal continence World J Surg 17 404–409

    Google Scholar 

  24. BJ Mander SD Wexner NS Williams et al. (1999) ArticleTitlePreliminary results of a multicenter trial of the electrically stimulated gracilis neoanal sphincter Br J Surg 86 1543–1548

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Wexner, S.D., Baeten, C., Bailey, R. et al. Long-Term Efficacy of Dynamic Graciloplasty for Fecal Incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 45, 809–818 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-6302-1

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-6302-1

Keywords

Navigation