title: Prospective study of artificial anal sphincter and dynamic graciloplasty for severe anal incontinence.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Dynamic graciloplasty and artificial anal sphincter are two options for refractory incontinence, the efficacy of which was compared in a prospective study.
  
  
  METHODS
  Between November 1966 and June 1998, 16 patients were operated on (artificial anal sphincter 8, dynamic graciloplasty 8). Four consecutive operations with each technique were performed by two colorectal surgeons (one initiated the study with the neosphincter and the other with dynamic graciloplasty). Two independent observers assessed postoperative results at 4-month intervals. Patients were followed up to January 2001, with a median (interquartile range) of 44 (13) months and 39 (15) months for the nesophincter and the dynamic graciloplasty, respectively.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Fourteen patients had complications. In the immediate postoperative period; there were eight cases of wound healing-related problems (four in the graciloplasty group). Perineal infection occurred in one patient in the graciloplasty group. At follow-up there were 11 complications (6 in the neosphincter group). Four patients undergoing neosphincter implantation had erosion or pain at the cuff site and had the implant removed (a new device was reimplanted in one). Four patients undergoing dynamic graciloplasty had the stimulator removed. Postoperatively the neosphincter was associated with a significantly lower score on the continence grading scale of the Cleveland Clinic Florida than graciloplasty.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The artificial anal sphincter is a more convenient technique than dynamic graciloplasty for institutions treating small number of patients. However, technical failures and complications during follow-up that require reoperation are very high in both types of treatments.
authors.affiliation: Unit of Coloproctology, Department of Surgery, Hospital Virgen del Camino, Pamplona, Universidad Pública de Navarra, C/Irunlarrea s/n, 31008, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain. hortizhu@cfnavarra.es
authors.forename: H
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Ortiz
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Armendariz
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: DeMiguel
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Solana
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Alós
authors.forename: J V
authors.initials: JV
authors.lastname: Roig
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001003:Anal Canal / Q000473:pathology* / Q000601:surgery*; D004599:Electric Stimulation Therapy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods; D005242:Fecal Incontinence / Q000601:surgery* / Q000628:therapy*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D011446:Prospective Studies; D019919:Prosthesis Implantation; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D016896:Treatment Outcome