Loading…

Optimal treatment for severe neurogenic bowel dysfunction after chronic spinal cord injury: a decision analysis

Background: When conservative management fails in patients with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI) and neurogenic bowel dysfunction, clinicians have to choose from a variety of treatment options which include colostomy, ileostomy, Malone anterograde continence enema (MACE) and sacral anterior root sti...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:British journal of surgery 2007-09, Vol.94 (9), p.1139-1150
Main Authors: Furlan, J. C., Urbach, D. R., Fehlings, M. G.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: When conservative management fails in patients with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI) and neurogenic bowel dysfunction, clinicians have to choose from a variety of treatment options which include colostomy, ileostomy, Malone anterograde continence enema (MACE) and sacral anterior root stimulator (SARS) implantation. This study employed a decision analysis to examine the optimal treatment for bowel management of young individuals with chronic refractory constipation in the setting of chronic SCI. Methods: A decision analysis was created to compare the four surgical strategies using baseline analysis, one‐way and two‐way sensitivity analyses, ‘worst scenario’ and ‘best scenario’ sensitivity analyses, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Quality‐adjusted life expectancy (QALE) was the primary outcome. Results: The baseline analysis indicated that patients who underwent the MACE procedure had the highest QALE value compared with the other interventions. Sensitivity analyses showed that these results were robust. Conclusion: The MACE procedure may provide the best long‐term outcome in terms of the probability of improving bowel function, reducing complication rates and the incidence of autonomic dysreflexia, and being congruent with patients' preferences. The analysis was sensitive to changes in assumptions about quality of life/utility, and thus the results could change if more specific estimates of utility became available. Copyright © 2007 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. MACE may be best in the long term
ISSN:0007-1323
1365-2168
DOI:10.1002/bjs.5781