Initial experience with SphinKeeper™ intersphincteric implants for faecal incontinence in the UK: a two‐centre retrospective clinical audit
Colorectal Disease2020Vol. 22(12), pp. 2161–2169
Citations Over TimeTop 10% of 2020 papers
Cosimo Alex Leo, Marjolein M. N. Leeuwenburgh, Alessandra Orlando, Alison Corr, S. Mark Scott, Jamie Murphy, Charles H. Knowles, C. J. Vaizey, Pasquale Giordano
Abstract
SphinKeeper appears to be a safe procedure for faecal incontinence. Overall, about 50% patients achieved a meaningful improvement in symptoms. However, clinical benefit was unrelated to the rate of misplaced/migrated implants. This has implications for confidence in proof of mechanism and also the need for technical refinement.
Related Papers
- → Usefulness of anorectal and endovaginal 3D ultrasound in the evaluation of sphincter and pubovisceral muscle defects using a new scoring system in women with fecal incontinence after vaginal delivery(2016)16 cited
- → Endoanal sonography in assessment of fecal incontinence following obstetric trauma(2003)24 cited
- → Anal Ultrasound Predicts the Response to Nonoperative Treatment of Fecal Incontinence in Men(1999)17 cited
- → Magnetic sphincter augmentation in patients with fecal incontinence after failure of an implanted artificial bowel sphincter(2018)5 cited
- → Characteristics of Anal Sphincter Dysfunction Using High-Resolution Manometry in Patients With Fecal Incontinence(2014)1 cited