Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pelvic floor procedures produce no consistent changes in anatomy or physiology

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

PURPOSE: Postanal repair was designed to restore both anatomy and function of the anal canal in neurogenic fecal incontinence. In most series, the degree of continence is improved in fewer than 50 percent of patients. Adding anterior levatorplasty and sphincter plication (total pelvic floor repair) is claimed to improve functional results. We performed a randomized trial comparing postanal and total pelvic floor repair for neurogenic incontinence. METHOD: Twenty female patients were studied. All had Type D incontinence (Parks and Browning). Anal manometry, defecography, and grading of the degree of continence were repeated 12 weeks after surgery to assess changes in clinical, manometric, and radiologic parameters. Statistical analysis was done using Wilcoxon's signed-rank test and Wilcoxon's two-sample test. RESULTS: Continence improved in eight patients. Differences among clinical, manometric, and radiologic data were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor repair procedures produce no consistent changes in anatomy or physiology. Clinical improvement is caused by creation of a local stenosis or by the placebo effect rather than by improvement of muscle function.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Browning GG, Parks AG. Postanal repair for neuropathic fecal incontinence: correlation of clinical results and anal canal pressures. Br J Surg 1983;70:101–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Scheuer M, Kuijpers JH, Jacobs PP. Postanal repair restores anatomy rather than function. Dis Colon Rectum 1989;32:960–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Womack NR, Morisson JF, Williams NS. Prospective study of the effects of postanal repair in neurogenic fecal incontinence. Br J Surg 1988;75:48–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yoshioka K, Keighley MR. Critical assessment of the quality of continence after postanal repair for fecal incontinence. Br J Surg 1989;76:1054–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Henry MM, Simson JM. Results of postanal repair: a retrospective study. Br J Surg 1985;72(Suppl):S17–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Keighley MR. Postanal repair for fecal incontinence. J R Soc Med 1984;77:285–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Setti Carraro P, Kamm MA, Nicholls RJ. Long-term results of postanal repair for neurogenic fecal incontinence. Br J Surg 1994;81:140–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pinho M, Ortiz J, Oya M, Panagamuwa B, Asperer J, Keighley MR. Total pelvic floor repair for the treatment of neuropathic fecal incontinence. Am J Surg 1992;163:340–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Deen KI, Oya M, Ortiz J, Keighly MR. Randomized trial comparing three forms of pelvic floor repair for neuropathic incontinence. Br J Surg 1993;80:794–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kuijpers HC, Scheuer M. Disorders of impaired fecal control: a clinical and manometric study. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:207–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kuijpers JH, Strijk SP. Diagnosis of disturbances of continence and defecation. Dis Colon Rectum 1984;27:658–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Miller R, Bartolo DC, Locke-Edmunds JC, Mortensen NJ. Prospective study of conservative and operative treatment for fecal incontinence. Br J Surg 1988;75:101–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yoshioka K, Hyland G, Keighley MR. Physiological changes after postanal repair and parameters predicting outcome. Br J Surg 1988;75:1220–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Orrom WJ, Miller R, Cornes H, Duthie G, Mortensen NJ, Bartolo DC. Comparison of anterior sphincteroplasty and postanal repair in the treatment of idiopathic fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:305–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Miller R, Orrom WJ, Cornes H, Duthie G, Bartolo DC. Anterior sphincter plication and levatorplasty in the treatment of fecal incontinence. Br J Surg 1989;76:1058–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bartolo DC, Roe AM, Locke-Edmunds JC, Virjee J, Mortensen NJ. Flap valve theory of anorectal incontinence. Br J Surg 1986;73:1012–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bannister JJ, Gibbons C, Read NW. Preservation of fecal continence during rises in intra-abdominal pressure: is there a role for the flap-valve? Gut 1987;28:1242–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Penninckx F, Debruyne C, Lestar B, Kerremans R. Observers variation in the radiological measurement of the anorectal angle. Int J Colorectal Dis 1990;5:94–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Departments of Surgery, Lukas-Andreas Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    W. F. van Tets M.D., Ph.D.

  2. the Departments of Surgery, University Hospital Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    J. H. C. Kuijpers M.D., Ph.D.

Authors
  1. W. F. van Tets M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. H. C. Kuijpers M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

van Tets, W.F., Kuijpers, J.H.C. Pelvic floor procedures produce no consistent changes in anatomy or physiology. Dis Colon Rectum 41, 365–369 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237493

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237493

Key words

Search

Navigation