{"title":"Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Efficacy of Sacral Neuromodulation in Chronic Constipation","authors":"Sameh Hany Emile MBBCh, MSc, MD , Justin Dourado MD , Anjelli Wignakumar MBBS, BSc (Hons) , Nir Horesh MD , Zoe Garoufalia MD , Rachel Gefen MD , Marylise Boutros MD , Steven D. Wexner MD","doi":"10.1016/j.neurom.2025.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The present systematic review aimed to assess the outcome of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) in adult patients with chronic constipation.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the efficacy of SNM in chronic constipation was conducted and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guideline. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were screened from their inception through March 2024. The primary outcome was improvement in constipation and quality of life (QoL), and the secondary outcome was adverse events after treatment. The risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed by the risk of bias 2 tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Five RCTs incorporating 187 patients (93.6% female) with a median age of 42.5 years were included; 154 patients underwent SNM whereas 86 patients were crossed over to sham stimulation, and 33 received conservative treatment, amounting to a control group of 119 patients. The odds of relief of constipation after SNM were similar to those in the control group in the random-effect model (odds ratio [OR]: 1.92, 95% CI: 0.68–5.42, <em>p</em> = 0.217). The median percentage of reduction in the Cleveland Clinic Florida/Wexner Constipation Score was 27.9% in the SNM group vs 18.4% in the control group. No significant differences were observed in QoL. Both groups had similar odds of adverse events (OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 0.19–25.53, <em>p</em> = 0.521).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Although a relatively safe treatment, SNM was not associated with any tangible improvements in either constipation or QoL.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19152,"journal":{"name":"Neuromodulation","volume":"28 5","pages":"Pages 737-745"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuromodulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1094715925000546","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
The present systematic review aimed to assess the outcome of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) in adult patients with chronic constipation.
Materials and Methods
A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the efficacy of SNM in chronic constipation was conducted and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guideline. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were screened from their inception through March 2024. The primary outcome was improvement in constipation and quality of life (QoL), and the secondary outcome was adverse events after treatment. The risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed by the risk of bias 2 tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.
Results
Five RCTs incorporating 187 patients (93.6% female) with a median age of 42.5 years were included; 154 patients underwent SNM whereas 86 patients were crossed over to sham stimulation, and 33 received conservative treatment, amounting to a control group of 119 patients. The odds of relief of constipation after SNM were similar to those in the control group in the random-effect model (odds ratio [OR]: 1.92, 95% CI: 0.68–5.42, p = 0.217). The median percentage of reduction in the Cleveland Clinic Florida/Wexner Constipation Score was 27.9% in the SNM group vs 18.4% in the control group. No significant differences were observed in QoL. Both groups had similar odds of adverse events (OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 0.19–25.53, p = 0.521).
Conclusion
Although a relatively safe treatment, SNM was not associated with any tangible improvements in either constipation or QoL.
期刊介绍:
Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface is the preeminent journal in the area of neuromodulation, providing our readership with the state of the art clinical, translational, and basic science research in the field. For clinicians, engineers, scientists and members of the biotechnology industry alike, Neuromodulation provides timely and rigorously peer-reviewed articles on the technology, science, and clinical application of devices that interface with the nervous system to treat disease and improve function.