Search

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a commonly occurring disease of high concern. It is characterized by voluntary and involuntary defecation in children and adolescents. It is not only a physical disease but also a psychological and behavioral disorder. FI poses a serious burden on individuals and their families and therefore has become a social problem. Unfortunately, the management of FI among children is still a challenge because the etiology varies widely. Constipation has been found to be the most common cause, while sphincter dysfunction and neurogenic abnormalities may also play a role. Currently, no consensus guidelines exist, and the criteria for selecting optional methods remain unclear. It is therefore necessary to improve the efficacy of diagnosis and management strategies of FI in children. This review focused on the classification and etiology, discussed the diagnosis and management methods of FI in children and adolescents, and aimed to guide future studies.

INTRODUCTION: Although the combination of transcutaneous sacral nerve stimulation (tSNS)and pelvic floor exercises (PFEs) has shown significant effectiveness in treating fecal incontinence (FI) after surgery for congenital anorectal malformation (CARM), not all patients achieve satisfactory continence. Therefore, identifying which individuals will benefit from this method is crucial. METHODS: A prospective cohort study enrolled 92 children with FI. All patients underwent tSNS with PFE treatment, and an improved outcome was defined as a Wexner score ≤4. A predictive model to identify the effects of tSNS with PFEs in FI was developed based on the analysis of magnetic resonance imaging and high-resolution anorectal manometry with area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve to evaluate the predictive value of external anal sphincter (EAS) thickness index and anal squeezing pressure (ASP). RESULTS: tSNS with PFEs improved outcomes in 72 patients and led to poor outcomes in 20(4 had their rectums deviate from the puborectalis muscle center or puborectal muscle ruptures while 16 lacked EAS with a lower ASP). The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for EAS thickness index and ASP in predicting the effects of tSNS with PFEs were 0.915 (95% confidence interval 0.846-0.983, P = 0.000) and 0.886 (95% confidence interval 0.819-0.952, P = 0.000), respectively. By applying cutoff values of 0.076 for EAS thickness index and 21.95 mm Hg for ASP, tSNS with PFEs was found to be ineffective. DISCUSSION: tSNS with PFEs is effective for most patients with FI after CARM surgery, except when the rectum deviates from the puborectal muscle center, puborectal muscle rupture occurs, or EAS is absent with a low ASP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]