Loading…
The Role of Biofeedback Therapy in Functional Proctologic Disorders
Background and Aims: The question which patients with functional proctologic disorders truly benefit from the biofeedback has not been equivocally resolved. The aim of this study was to assess our results of biofeedback therapy in patients with anal incontinence or constipation. Material and Methods...
Saved in:
Published in: | Scandinavian Journal of Surgery 2004, Vol.93 (3), p.184-190 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Request full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Background and Aims:
The question which patients with functional proctologic disorders truly benefit from the biofeedback has not been equivocally resolved. The aim of this study was to assess our results of biofeedback therapy in patients with anal incontinence or constipation.
Material and Methods:
Fifty-two consecutive patients who were treated with biofeedback therapy between January 1998 and March 2002 were studied. Data was collected from our proctologic database.
Results:
Of the twenty-two patients with anal incontinence who underwent biofeedback therapy during the study period, twenty patients had incontinence affecting quality of life. Twelve patients (60 percent) benefited from biofeedback as judged by improvement of incontinence symptoms affecting quality of life; all four patients with partial sphincter defects, three out of four patients after secondary repair, three out of five patients with persistent incontinence after rectal prolapse surgery and two out of seven patients having idiopathic incontinence. Of the thirty patients who underwent biofeedback therapy for constipation, twenty-five had intractable symptoms of constipation. Constipation resolved in sixteen patients (64 percent); in thirteen out of nineteen (68 percent) of those with pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) and in three out of six (50 percent) having combined PFD and slow transit constipation. In patients with PFD constipation was resolved in ten out of thirteen patients (77 percent) with anismus but in only three out of six (50 percent) having other causes.
Conclusions:
Biofeedback therapy improves incontinence after sphincter repairs and in patients with partial external sphincter defects, but does not improve idiopathic incontinence. Biofeedback is also effective in patients with constipation, especially when anismus is the only cause for symptoms of constipation and difficult evacuation. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1457-4969 1799-7267 |
DOI: | 10.1177/145749690409300303 |