Published online Feb 28, 2024. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v16.i2.32
Peer-review started: September 23, 2023
First decision: November 13, 2023
Revised: November 24, 2023
Accepted: February 2, 2024
Article in press: February 2, 2024
Published online: February 28, 2024
Processing time: 152 Days and 16 Hours
Fecal incontinence is a disease condition with significant morbidity and social stigmata. Many modalities are used in its treatment and sacral nerve stimulation, lately has been widely accepted as the second line treatment, after the conservative measures fail. Sacral nerve stimulation has been shown to be beneficial in short and long term studies. However, one limitation of its use in the past was concurrent use with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which was considered unsafe if used for MRI below the head. Almost 23% of the removals of implants was because the patient required MRI. For this reason, multiple tests and innovation was done and a newer tined lead was developed which was safe to be used with MRI under specific settings. This was United States Food and Drug Administration approved for use in 2020. Our study is to evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of using this recently available treatment modality in fecal incontinence.
Main topics we are trying to deal with are: (1) Does the currently available tined lead (InterStim), which is safe to use in MRI, reciprocate the outcomes and efficacy to the previously available tined lead (InterStim); (2) Any new challenges were faced related to the currently available tined lead. The study is important as this would definitely help us take a leap forward in the management of fecal incontinence. If the outcomes are similar to the previously available system, this will give more confidence to the providers and also will provide benefits to patients.
The objective of this study was to evaluate whether the currently available MRI compatible sacral nerve stimulation system is as efficacious and as safe as the previously available system. At least in the short term, the efficacy is good with a similar safety profile. However, future research including longer follow up results from the current study and future studies with a larger sample size will be needed to further substantiate the findings.
This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from multiple institutions. SPSS 20 was used for data analysis. Descriptive statistics were done including frequencies, percentages, and means were calculated from the data.
The mean age was 63 years old. There were concomitant symptoms of diarrhea in 23%, fecal urgency in 58.9% and urinary incontinence in 28.5% of the patients. Patients either underwent peripheral nerve stimulation (PNE) or stage 1 as the first procedure followed by stage 2 of implant placement. 15 (20.5%) patients underwent PNE before proceeding to a permanent implant. One important adverse event noted was an external lead connection migration, which was seen in 7 (9.6%) patients after stage 1 procedure. One patient required explantation due to infection, 7 (9.6%) patients had complications which were nerve pain, hematoma, infection, lead fracture and bleeding. Mean follow up was 6.62 months and 93.2% patients reported significant improvement of symptoms. These findings at least in the short term are efficacious and safe as the preciously available system, however, long term data and future studies with increased power are needed.
A new theory that this study proposes is that the newer tined lead (InterStim) for treatment of fecal incontinence is as efficacious and has similar safety profiles as compared to the previously available system.
The direction of the future research should be towards conducting more high powered studies, including evaluating the newer system with the MRI usage to see whether the safety with the MRI can be substantiated.