» Articles » PMID: 26621029

Multicentre Observational Study of the Gatekeeper for Faecal Incontinence

Overview
Journal Br J Surg
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2015 Dec 2
PMID 26621029
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: A variety of therapeutic approaches are available for faecal incontinence. Implantation of Gatekeeper prostheses is a new promising option. The primary endpoint of this prospective observational multicentre study was to assess the clinical efficacy of Gatekeeper implantation in patients with faecal incontinence. Secondary endpoints included the assessment of patients' quality of life, and the feasibility and safety of implantation.

Methods: Patients with faecal incontinence, with either intact sphincters or internal anal sphincter lesions extending for less than 60° of the anal circumference, were selected. Intersphincteric implantation of six prostheses was performed. At baseline, and 1, 3 and 12 months after implantation, the number of faecal incontinence episodes, Cleveland Clinic Faecal Incontinence, Vaizey and American Medical Systems, Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale and Short Form 36 Health Survey scores were recorded. Endoanal ultrasonography was performed at baseline and follow-up.

Results: Fifty-four patients were implanted. After Gatekeeper implantation, incontinence to gas, liquid and solid stool improved significantly, soiling was reduced, and ability to defer defaecation enhanced. All faecal incontinence severity scores were significantly reduced, and patients' quality of life improved. At 12 months, 30 patients (56 per cent) showed at least 75 per cent improvement in all faecal incontinence parameters, and seven (13 per cent) became fully continent. In three patients a single prosthesis was extruded during surgery, but was replaced immediately. After implantation, prosthesis dislodgement occurred in three patients; no replacement was required.

Conclusion: Anal implantation of the Gatekeeper in patients with faecal incontinence was effective and safe. Clinical benefits were sustained at 1-year follow-up.

Citing Articles

Gatekeeper™ Prostheses Implants in the Anal Canal for Gas Incontinence and Soiling: Long-Term Follow-Up.

Tur-Martinez J, Lagares-Tena L, Hinojosa-Fano J, Arroyo A, Navarro-Luna A, Munoz-Duyos A J Clin Med. 2024; 13(20).

PMID: 39458106 PMC: 11508701. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13206156.


Long-term outcome after SphinKeeper® surgery for treating fecal incontinence-who are good candidates?.

Dawoud C, Widmann K, Pereyra D, Harpain F, Riss S Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023; 408(1):456.

PMID: 38052934 PMC: 10698116. DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03188-6.


Endosonographic monitoring of Sphinkeeper prostheses movements: does physical activity have an impact?.

Dawoud C, Gidl D, Widmann K, Pereyra D, Harpain F, Kama B Updates Surg. 2023; 76(1):169-177.

PMID: 37640968 PMC: 10805872. DOI: 10.1007/s13304-023-01636-y.


Clinical effectiveness and safety of self-expandable implantable bulking agents for faecal incontinence: a systematic review.

Gassner L, Wild C, Walter M BMC Gastroenterol. 2022; 22(1):389.

PMID: 35978293 PMC: 9386976. DOI: 10.1186/s12876-022-02441-4.


An evaluation of the long-term effectiveness of Gatekeeper™ intersphincteric implants for passive faecal incontinence.

Jabbar S, Camilleri-Brennan J Tech Coloproctol. 2022; 26(7):537-543.

PMID: 35593969 PMC: 9213285. DOI: 10.1007/s10151-022-02630-z.


References
1.
Tjandra J, Lim J, Hiscock R, Rajendra P . Injectable silicone biomaterial for fecal incontinence caused by internal anal sphincter dysfunction is effective. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005; 47(12):2138-46. DOI: 10.1007/s10350-004-0760-3. View

2.
Luo C, Samaranayake C, Plank L, Bissett I . Systematic review on the efficacy and safety of injectable bulking agents for passive faecal incontinence. Colorectal Dis. 2009; 12(4):296-303. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2009.01828.x. View

3.
Maeda Y, Vaizey C, Kamm M . Pilot study of two new injectable bulking agents for the treatment of faecal incontinence. Colorectal Dis. 2007; 10(3):268-72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01318.x. View

4.
Rockwood T, Church J, Fleshman J, Kane R, Mavrantonis C, Thorson A . Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life Scale: quality of life instrument for patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000; 43(1):9-16; discussion 16-7. DOI: 10.1007/BF02237236. View

5.
Vaizey C, Carapeti E, Cahill J, Kamm M . Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems. Gut. 1998; 44(1):77-80. PMC: 1760067. DOI: 10.1136/gut.44.1.77. View