Article

Cecostomy button for antegrade enemas: survey of 29 patients

Department of Paediatric Surgery, Hautepierre Hospital, 67098 Strasbourg, France.
Journal of Pediatric Surgery (Impact Factor: 1.31). 11/2008; 43(10):1853-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2008.03.043
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study evaluated the Trap-door button use (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IL) for antegrade enemas in children.
Since 2002, patients with fecal incontinence or encopresis and constipation underwent percutaneous cecostomy under laparoscopy using a button. Technical details are described. Age at surgery, operative time, hospital stay, diagnosis, indications for cecostomy, and duration of follow-up were recorded. A survey was proposed via a questionnaire that was sent to the patients. Patients wearing the button for less than 1 month were excluded from this evaluation. The survey concerned volume and frequency of enemas, difficulties encountered, benefits and disadvantages of this method, and assessment of the antegrade enemas in continence.
Twenty-nine patients, 18 males and 11 females, aged 3 to 21 years (mean, 8.5 years) underwent laparoscopic Trap-door button placement. The indications for all the patients were intractable fecal incontinence in 24 cases and constipation with encopresis in 5 cases. Incontinence was because of myelomeningocele (n = 10), anorectal malformations (n = 11), caudal regression syndrome (n = 1), 22q11 syndrome (n= 1), and Hirschsprung disease with encephalopathy with convulsions (n = 1). Constipation with encopresis was because of sacrococcygeal teratoma (n = 1), cerebral palsy (n = 1), and acquired megarectum with psychiatric and social disorders (n = 3). A total of 26 cecostomy button placements and 3 sigmoidostomy button placements were successful with no intraoperative complication. The mean operative time was 25 minutes (10-40 minutes), and the hospital stay was 2.5 days (1-4 days). Twenty-two parents or patients answered the questionnaire. At the time of this survey, 2 patients had improved their fecal continence and had had the button removed. A mean of 4 weekly enemas was enough to improve fecal continence troubles (range, 1 daily to 1 for 2 weeks). The volume for enemas was 250 to 1000 mL (mean, 700 mL). The time required for the irrigation of the bowel by gravity took from 5 to 60 minutes (mean, 25 minutes) for 20 patients. Before surgery, 14 patients needed a diaper, day and night, and 6 needed sanitary protection. Soiling was a very significant inconvenience for all the patients. After surgery, only 5 patients needed a diaper (cerebral palsy, 22q11, cloacal malformation, myelomeningocele, bladder exstrophy) because of moderate results or urinary incontinence and continued soiling. Patients were asked to give an assessment (null = 0, bad = 1, fair = 2, good = 3, very good = 4). None of the patients felt there had been no changes or a bad result. There were 5 patients who felt they had an average result, 5 a good result, and 12 a very good result. The mean grade was 3.44 (17.2/20). A total of 3 patients had hypertrophic granulation tissue formation around the cecostomy button, and 12 had tiny leakage.
Percutaneous placement of a cecostomy button under laparoscopic control is an easy and major complication-free procedure. The use of the Trap-door device by the patients or with the help of the parents for antegrade enemas is effective and satisfactory. It improves the quality of life and is reversible.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
254 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Even though fecal incontinence (FI) in children is most commonly the result of functional constipation, there are organic conditions that can be associated with incontinence. FI has a major impact on the quality of life of those children who experience it. The general objectives of any bowel program are to achieve predictability and independence. This is achieved by manipulating colonic transit and stool consistency and by producing more controlled evacuations, usually with the use of rectal interventions. Dietary interventions and medications can be used to change stool consistency or to manipulate transit by accelerating or slowing it down. Biofeedback or other interventions that increase sphincter pressure can also be used to improve anorectal function. Enemas or suppositories can be used to empty the sigmoid colon in a more controlled manner. With the recent advent of the antegrade colonic enemas, the patient can have predictable bowel movements and become independent.
    Expert review of gastroenterology & hepatology 09/2013; 7(7):657-67. DOI:10.1586/17474124.2013.832500
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fecal incontinence is common in children with ano-rectal malformations and spina bifida being a disturbing cause of life quality and social integration. Medical treatments (laxatives, enemas, daily habits and diet attitudes) are frequently unsuccessful. Many surgical therapies have been proposed to treat this condition but all of them are far away from being the best treatment option. We report a case of a 17 years-old adolescent with spina bifida and fecal incontinence that has been submitted to percutaneous endoscopic cecostomy. Even though it is not the ideal treatment for this condition, it revealed to be a good option: it's easy and safe to perform; provides a successful management of fecal continence and it's associated with high satisfaction from the adolescent and its family.
    09/2012; 19(5):255–258. DOI:10.1016/j.jpg.2012.04.023
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fecal incontinence is a frequent and debilitating condition that may result from a multitude of different causes. Treatment is often challenging and needs to be individualized. During the last several years, new technologies have been developed, and others are emerging from clinical trials to commercialization. Although their specific roles in the management of fecal incontinence have not yet been completely defined, surgeons have access to them and patients may request them. The purpose of this project is to put into perspective, for both the patient and the practitioner, the relative positions of new and emerging technologies in order to propose a treatment algorithm.
    Surgical Endoscopy 03/2014; 28(8). DOI:10.1007/s00464-014-3464-3 · 3.31 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
18 Downloads
Available from
Oct 8, 2014