Download PDF
Zentralbl Chir 2012; 137(4): 328-334
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1315128
Übersicht
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Anal Sphincter Repair zur Therapie der Stuhlinkontinenz – Wann und wie?

Anal Sphincter Repair in the Treatment of Anal Incontinence – When and How to Do it?
S. Kersting
1   Abteilung für Koloproktologie, Prosper-Hospital, Recklinghausen, Deutschland
,
E. Berg
1   Abteilung für Koloproktologie, Prosper-Hospital, Recklinghausen, Deutschland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
29 August 2012 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die anale Inkontinenz ist eine Erkrankung mit hoher Prävalenz in der Bevölkerung. Für einen Großteil der Patienten bedeutet die Erkrankung eine schwere Belastung und führt nicht selten zur sozialen Isolation. Ein palpatorisch und endosonografisch nachgewiesener Sphinkterdefekt kann durch Sphinkterrekonstruktion mit ähnlichen Ergebnissen als End-zu-End-Naht oder in überlappender Technik durchgeführt werden. Eine Verbesserung der Kontinenz kann dadurch bei mehr als 60 % der Patienten erreicht werden. Dieser Effekt lässt aber im Verlauf der Zeit nach, sodass nach 5 Jahren nur noch bei 40–50 % der Patienten die Kontinenzleistung erhalten ist. Die Prognose verschlechtert sich im höheren Lebensalter und bei gleichzeitiger Beckenbodensenkung. Bei der neurogenen Inkontinenz kommt das Prinzip des Anal Repairs zur Anwendung mit Raffung des inneren und äußeren Schließmuskels sowie der Beckenbodenmuskulatur. Dies kann als Posterior oder Anterior Repair bzw. in Kombination (Total Pelvic Floor Repair) durchgeführt werden. Die Erfolgsrate ist gering, sodass diese Verfahren heute nur noch selten zur Anwendung kommen, insbesondere da mit der Sakralnervenstimulation ein weniger invasives, aber auch viel teureres Verfahren zur Verfügung steht. Schwierig bleibt die Interpretation der publizierten Ergebnisse, da der Erfolg der OP sehr unterschiedlich gemessen wird: Subjektive Verbesserung, Zufriedenheit, Veränderung eines Inkontinenzscores oder Erlangung vollständiger Kontinenz. Als gesichert kann allerdings angesehen werden, dass bei einer traumatischen Sphinkterläsion die Ergebnisse nach sofortiger Sphinkterrekonstruktion besser sind als bei einem zweizeitigen Vorgehen mit primärer Stomaanlage.

Abstract

Anal incontinence is a disease of high prevalence. For many patients the disease causes severe stress and often results in social isolation. Whenever a sphincter lesion has been diagnosed by digital rectal examination and endosonographic access, anal sphincter reconstruction can be performed with the same results either in overlapping or in end-to-end suture technique. sing these procedures, in more than 60 % of patients the continence can be initially improved. However, benefit decreases after 5 years down to 40–50 %. The prognosis gets worse with increasing age and supplementary descending pelvic floor. Anal repair with reconstruction of internal and external sphincters is performed in neurogenic incontinence. This can be achieved by posterior or anterior anal repair (total pelvic floor repair). Nowadays these procedures are not common, due to unsuccessfulness. Instead, sacral nerve stimulation as a more expensive but less invasive method has displaced the anal repair on this indication. Interpretation of the published results remains delicate because of heterogenous evaluation criteria of postoperative outcome: subjective amelioration, postoperative satisfaction and quality of life, improvement of incontinence score or achievement of complete anal continence. However, it is proven that after immediate reconstruction of traumatic sphincter lesions the postoperative outcome is better than a two-step operation with primary ostomy.

Schlüsselwörter

Koloproktologie - Stuhlinkontinenz - Sphinkterdefekt - Anal Repair - Sphinkteroplastik

Key words

coloproctology - faecal incontinence - anal sphincter defect - anal repair - sphincteroplasty
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Lange J, Moelle B, Girona J. Chirurgische Proktologie. Heidelberg: Springer; 2012
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Jackson SL, Hull TL. Fecal incontinence in women. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1998; 53: 741-747 quiz 748–751
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Johanson JF, Lafferty J. Epidemiology of fecal incontinence: the silent affliction. Am J Gastroenterol 1996; 91: 33-36
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Tan JJ, Chan M, Tjandra JJ. Evolving therapy for fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2007; 50: 1950-1967
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Mavrantonis C, Wexner SD. A clinical approach to fecal incontinence. J Clin Gastroenterol 1998; 27: 108-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Galandiuk S, Roth LA, Greene QJ. Anal incontinence-sphincter ani repair: indications, techniques, outcome. Langenbeckʼs Arch Surg 2009; 394: 425-433
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Andromanakos N, Filippou D, Skandalakis P et al. Anorectal incontinence. Pathogenesis and choice of treatment. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2006; 15: 41-49
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Bols EM, Hendriks EJ, Berghmans BC et al. A systematic review of etiological factors for postpartum fecal incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2010; 89: 302-314
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Tin RY, Schulz J, Gunn B et al. The prevalence of anal incontinence in post-partum women following obstetrical anal sphincter injury. Int Urogynecol J 2010; 21: 927-932
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ommer A, Wenger FA, Rolfs T et al. Continence disorders after anal surgery – a relevant problem?. Int J Colorectal Dis 2008; 23: 1023-1031
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Stamatiadis A, Konstantinou E, Theodosopoulou E et al. Frequency of operative trauma to anal sphincters: evaluation with endoanal ultrasound. Gastroenterol Nurs 2002; 25: 55-59
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Brown SR, Nelson RL. Surgery for faecal incontinence in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (Online) 2007; CD001757
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Felt-Bersma RJ, Cuesta MA. Faecal incontinence 1994: which test and which treatment?. Netherlands J Med 1994; 44: 182-188
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Herold A, Lehur EA, Matzel KE et al. Coloproctology. Heidelberg: Springer; 2008
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Parks AG, McPartlin JF. Late repair of injuries of the anal sphincter. Proc R Soc Med 1971; 64: 1187-1189
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Devesa JM, Rey A, Hervas PL et al. Artificial anal sphincter: complications and functional results of a large personal series. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45: 1154-1163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Nelken N, Lewis F. The influence of injury severity on complication rates after primary closure or colostomy for penetrating colon trauma. Ann Surg 1989; 209: 439-447
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Papadopoulos VN, Michalopoulos A, Apostolidis S et al. Surgical management of colorectal injuries: colostomy or primary repair?. Tech Coloproctol 2011; 15 (Suppl. 01) S63-S66
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Sasaki LS, Mittal V, Allaben RD. Primary repair of colon injuries: a retrospective analysis. Am Surg 1994; 60: 522-527
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Thomson SR, Baker A, Baker LW. Prospective audit of multiple penetrating injuries to the colon: further support for primary closure. J R Coll Surg Edinb 1996; 41: 20-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Farrell SA. Overlapping compared with end-to-end repair of third and fourth degree obstetric anal sphincter tears. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2011; 23: 386-390
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Tjandra JJ, Han WR, Goh J et al. Direct repair vs. overlapping sphincter repair: a randomized, controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 2003; 46: 937-942
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Hasegawa H, Yoshioka K, Keighley MR. Randomized trial of fecal diversion for sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 2000; 43: 961-964
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Browning GG, Motson RW. Anal sphincter injury. Management and results of Parks sphincter repair. Ann Surg 1984; 199: 351-357
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Engel AF, Brummelkamp WH. Secondary surgery after failed postanal or anterior sphincter repair. Int J Colorectal Dis 1994; 9: 187-190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Nikiteas N, Korsgen S, Kumar D et al. Audit of sphincter repair. Factors associated with poor outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 1996; 39: 1164-1170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kammerer-Doak DN, Dominguez C, Harner K et al. Surgical repair of fecal incontinence. Correlation of sonographic anal sphincter integrity with subjective cure. J Reprod Med 1998; 43: 576-580
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gronewold M, Kroencke T, Hagedorn A et al. [External anal sphincter repair using the overlapping technique in patients with anal incontinence and concomitant pudendal nerve damage]. Zentralbl Chir 2008; 133: 129-134
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Felt-Bersma RJ, Cuesta MA, Koorevaar M. Anal sphincter repair improves anorectal function and endosonographic image. A prospective clinical study. Dis Colon Rectum 1996; 39: 878-885
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Bravo Gutierrez A, Madoff RD, Lowry AC et al. Long-term results of anterior sphincteroplasty. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47: 727-731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Halverson AL, Hull TL. Long-term outcome of overlapping anal sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45: 345-348
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Malouf AJ, Norton CS, Engel AF et al. Long-term results of overlapping anterior anal-sphincter repair for obstetric trauma. Lancet 2000; 355: 260-265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Zutshi M, Tracey TH, Bast J et al. Ten-year outcome after anal sphincter repair for fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2009; 52: 1089-1094
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Giordano P, Renzi A, Efron J et al. Previous sphincter repair does not affect the outcome of repeat repair. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45: 635-640
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Pinedo G, Vaizey CJ, Nicholls RJ et al. Results of repeat anal sphincter repair. Brit J Surg 1999; 86: 66-69
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Vaizey CJ, Norton C, Thornton MJ et al. Long-term results of repeat anterior anal sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47: 858-863
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Jensen LL, Lowry AC. Biofeedback improves functional outcome after sphincteroplasty. Dis Colon Rectum 1997; 40: 197-200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Tan E, Ngo NT, Darzi A et al. Meta-analysis: sacral nerve stimulation versus conservative therapy in the treatment of faecal incontinence. Int J Colorectal Dis 2011; 26: 275-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Brouwer R, Duthie G. Sacral nerve neuromodulation is effective treatment for fecal incontinence in the presence of a sphincter defect, pudendal neuropathy, or previous sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 2010; 53: 273-278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Chan MK, Tjandra JJ. Sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence: external anal sphincter defect vs. intact anal sphincter. Dis Colon Rectum 2008; 51: 1015-1024
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Ratto C, Litta F, Parello A et al. Sacral nerve stimulation is a valid approach in fecal incontinence due to sphincter lesions when compared to sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 2010; 53: 264-272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Altomare DF, De Fazio M, Giuliani RT et al. Sphincteroplasty for fecal incontinence in the era of sacral nerve modulation. World J Gastroenterol 2010; 16: 5267-5271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Leroi AM, Kamm MA, Weber J et al. Internal anal sphincter repair. Int J Colorectal Dis 1997; 12: 243-245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Morgan R, Patel B, Beynon J et al. Surgical management of anorectal incontinence due to internal anal sphincter deficiency. Brit J Surg 1997; 84: 226-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Abou-Zeid AA. Preliminary experience in management of fecal incontinence caused by internal anal sphincter injury. Dis Colon Rectum 2000; 43: 198-202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Deen KI, Oya M, Ortiz J et al. Randomized trial comparing three forms of pelvic floor repair for neuropathic faecal incontinence. Brit Surg 1993; 80: 794-798
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Mackey P, Mackey L, Kennedy ML et al. Postanal repair – do the long-term results justify the procedure?. Colorectal Dis 2010; 12: 367-372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Matsuoka H, Mavrantonis C, Wexner SD et al. Postanal repair for fecal incontinence–is it worthwhile?. Dis Colon Rectum 2000; 43: 1561-1567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Rieger NA, Sarre RG, Saccone GT et al. Postanal repair for faecal incontinence: long-term follow-up. Aust N Z J Surg 1997; 67: 566-570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Pinho M, Ortiz J, Oya M et al. Total pelvic floor repair for the treatment of neuropathic fecal incontinence. Am J Surg 1992; 163: 340-343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar