Refractory functional constipation: clinical management or appendicostomy?

Objective

To compare the clinical evolution in patients with refractory functional constipation undergoing different therapeutic regimens: oral laxatives and antegrade enemas via appendicostomy or clinical treatment with oral laxatives and rectal enemas.

Methods

Analysis of a series of 28 patients with a mean age of 7.9 years (2.4–11), followed‐up in a tertiary outpatient clinic. Refractory functional constipation was defined as continuous retentive fecal incontinence after at least a 12‐month period of consensus therapy. After the diagnosis of refractory condition, appendicostomy was proposed and performed in 17 patients. Outcomes: (1) persistence of retentive fecal incontinence despite the use of enemas, (2) control of retentive fecal incontinence with enemas, and (3) control of retentive fecal incontinence, spontaneous evacuations, with no need for enemas.

Results

Six and 12 months after the therapeutic option, control of retentive fecal incontinence was observed only in patients who underwent surgery, 11/17 and 14/17, p = 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively. At 24 months, control of retentive fecal incontinence was also more frequent in operated patients: 13/17 versus 3/11 with clinical treatment, p = 0.005. In the final evaluation, the median follow‐up times were 2.6 and 3 years (operated vs. clinical treatment, p = 0.40); one patient in each group was lost to follow‐up and 9/16 operated patients had spontaneous bowel movements vs. 3/10 in the clinical treatment group, p = 0.043. Surgical complications, totaling 42 episodes, were observed 14/17 patients.

Conclusion

Appendicostomy, although associated with a high frequency of complications, controlled retentive fecal incontinence earlier and more frequently than clinical treatment. The choice of one of the methods should be made by the family, after adequate information about the risks and benefits of each alternative.