Skip to content

Comparison of Sacral Nerve Modulation and Pudendal Nerve Stimulation in Treatment of Fecal Incontinence

Comparison of Sacral Nerve Modulation and Pudendal Nerve Stimulation in Treatment of Fecal Incontinence

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01069016
Enrollment
30
Registered
2010-02-17
Start date
2010-02-28
Completion date
2015-02-28
Last updated
2017-07-21

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Fecal Incontinence

Keywords

Fecal Incontinence, Colorectal surgery, Sacral nerve stimulation, Pudendal nerve stimulation

Brief summary

Sacral nerve modulation (SNM) is an established treatment for refractory lower urinary tract and bowel dysfunction (Spinelli 2008). Pudendal nerve stimulation (PNS) has been proposed for patients failing SNM treatment of urinary dysfunction (Spinelli 2005). In this study SNM and PNS are compared for the treatment of fecal incontinence. In a test phase, both treatments will be applied for one week each in a randomized and blinded order (cross-over design). After the test phase the more successful treatment will be determined and applied permanently. If both treatments are equally sufficient, PNS will be chosen for permanent stimulation, since preliminary data indicate that PNS has a lower power consumption than SNM. Lower power consumption results in a longer lifetime of the stimulator, thus requiring less replacement surgeries.

Detailed description

Primary Surgery: * Implantation of two electrodes, one placed next to the sacral nerve, one close to the pudendal nerve. Electrode wires are passed through the skin just above the gluteal region and are marked S and P. One of the sub-investigators (not involved in the follow-up) replaces the S and P marks by 1 and 2 marks in absence of the operating surgeon. Assignment of 1 and 2 is carried out in a predefined randomized fashion (computerized block randomization). Test phase: * Electrode labeled 1 is connected to a stimulator and the nerve is stimulated for one week, then the other electrode is stimulated for a week. * Based on bowel habit diary, Wexner score (Jorge 1993) and subjective experience of the patient, the more successful treatment is chosen. If both electrodes were equally successful, the pudendal nerve electrode will be chosen for permanent stimulation. Secondary surgery: * After unblinding, the less effective electrode is removed and the remaining electrode is connected to an implanted stimulator (permanent phase). In case both treatments were unsuccessful, both electrodes are removed.

Interventions

For one week the sacral nerve is continuously stimulated by an external pulse generator. Strength of stimulation can be adjusted by the patient.

PROCEDUREPudendal nerve stimulation

For one week the pudendal nerve is continuously stimulated by an external pulse generator. Strength of stimulation can be adjusted by the patient.

Sponsors

Cantonal Hospital of St. Gallen
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* fecal incontinence nonresponsive to conservative treatment

Exclusion criteria

* sacral or perineal infection * sphincter defect larger than 60° (sonography) * pregnancy

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Power consumption of stimulator14 days

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Wexner Score (Jorge 1993)7, 14 days, 3, 6 & 12 months
Incidence of surgical complications (adverse events) graded according to Dindo (2004)30 days
Quality of Life (FIQL (Rockwood 2000))14 days, 3, 6 & 12 months

Countries

Switzerland

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026