Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Management of fecal incontinence in children without functional fecal retention

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Gastroenterology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

The management of the fecal incontinence in children is difficult, and its social consequences are usually devastating. The general objectives of any bowel program are to produce social continence, predictability, and eventually independence. How to achieve those goals depends in part on the underlying condition. In children, fecal incontinence can occur from a variety of conditions. The most common is overflow incontinence from functional fecal retention, but it can also occur in otherwise healthy children with functional nonretentive fecal soiling or in children with organic causes of fecal incontinence, such as congenital malformations, or any other condition affecting the anorectum, anal sphincters, or the spinal cord. The therapeutic regimen that is recommended in patients with nonretentive fecal soiling consists of explanation and support for the child and parents, a nonaccusatory approach, and a toilet training program with a rewarding system. Biofeedback does not play an important role, and laxatives need to be used with caution, as they may exacerbate the incontinence. For those patients with congenital/neuropathic incontinence a combination of maneuvers to change stool consistency, colonic transit, anorectal function, and rectosigmoid evacuation is used. Stool consistency can be changed with the use of dietary interventions or medications. Stool transit can be slowed (antimotility agents) or accelerated (laxatives) with the use of medications. Anorectal function can be improved with the use of biofeedback or procedures to alter sphincter pressure, and the production of a bowel movement can be induced with maneuvers to empty the sigmoid (suppositories, enemas). With the recent advent of the Antegrade Colonic Enema (ACE), the patient is then able to be predictable and independent. This procedure creates a continent conduit from the skin to the cecum that can be catheterized or accessed for self-administration of enemas. The ACE has revolutionized the treatment of children with fecal incontinence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Nurko S: Complications after gastrointestinal surgery. A medical perspective. In Pediatric Gastrointestinal Disease, edn 3. Walker WAea, ed. Philadelphia: Decker B. C. Inc.; 2000: 1843–1876. Comprehensive review of the approach to the treatment of children with postoperative problems after surgery for impeforate anus.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Jorge JM, Wexner SD: Anatomy and physiology of the rectum and anus. Eur J Surg 1997, 163: 723–731.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Staiano A, Ciarla C: Pelvic floor syndromes: Infant dyschezia, functional fecal retention and nonretentive soiling. In: Hyman PE, ed. Pediatric Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders. New York: Academic Professional Information Services, Inc; 1999: 10.8–10.22.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rasquin-Weber A, Hyman PE, Cucchiara S, et al.: Childhood functional gastrointestinal disorders. Gut 1999, 45 Suppl 2: II60–68. Description of the Rome II criteria for the diagnosis of functional bowel disorders in children.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Benninga MA, Taminiau JA: Diagnosis and treatment efficacy of functional nonretentive fecal soiling in childhood. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2001, 32 Suppl 1: S42–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. van Ginkel R, Benninga MA, Blommaart PJ, et al.: Lack of benefit of laxatives as adjunctive therapy for functional nonretentive fecal soiling in children. J Pediatr 2000, 137: 808–13. Randomized trial that suggested that the use of laxatives in children with non retentive fecal soiling may be detrimental.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rintala RJ: Fecal incontinence in anorectal malformations, neuropathy, and miscellaneous conditions. Semin Pediatr Surg 2002, 11: 75–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Pena A, Hong A: Advances in the management of anorectal malformations. American Journal of Surgery 2000, 180: 370–376. An update on the treatment of children with imperforate anus. Advances in classification, surgical techniques and medical treatment are mentioned.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Di Lorenzo C, Benninga MA: Pathophysiology of pediatric fecal incontinence. Gastroenterology 2004, 126(1 Suppl 1):S33–40. A comprehensive review and analysis of different aspects of fecal incontinence in children.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Diseth TH, Emblem R: Somatic function, mental health, and psychosocial adjustment of adolescents with anorectal anomalies. J Pediatr Surg 1996, 31: 638–643.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Barker E, Saulino M, Caristo AM: Spina bifida. Rn 2002, 65: 33–38, quiz 39.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Malone PS, Curry JI, Osborne A: The antegrade continence enema procedure why, when and how? World Journal of Urology 1998, 16: 274–278.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Pigeon N, Leroi AM, Devroede G, et al.: Colonic transit time in patients with myelomeningocele. Neurogastroenterol Motil 1997, 9: 63–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Loening-Baucke V, Desch L, Wolraich M: Biofeedback training for patients with myelomeningocele and fecal incontinence. Dev Med Child Neurology 1988, 30: 781–790.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Morera C, Nurko S: Rectal manometry in patients with isolated sacral agenesis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2003, 37: 47–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Loening-Baucke V, Miele E, Staiano A: Fiber (glucomannan) is beneficial in the treatment of childhood constipation. Pediatrics 2004, 113: e259–264. Trial that showed that the addition of fiber in children with constipation is beneficial.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Staiano A, Simeone D, Del Giudice E, et al.: Effect of the dietary fiber glucomannan on chronic constipation in neurologically impaired children. J Pediatr 2000, 136: 41–45.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Di Lorenzo C, Solzi GF, Flores AF, et al.: Colonic motility after surgery for Hirschsprung’s disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2000, 95: 1759–1764.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Blair GK, Djonlic K, Fraser GC, et al.: The bowel management tube: an effective means for controlling fecal incontinence. J Pediatr Surg 1992, 27: 1269–1272.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Worona L, Hernandez M, Consuelo A, et al.: Successful use of biofeedback for the treatment of fecal incontinence in children with imperforate anus. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2000, 31: S243.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bassotti G, Whitehead WE: Biofeedback as a treatment approach to gastrointestinal tract disorders. Am J Gastroenterol 1994, 89: 158–164.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Enck P: Biofeedback training in disordered defecation. A critical review. Dig Dis Sci 1993, 38: 1953–1960.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Diseth TH, Egeland T, Emblem R: Effects of anal invasive treatment and incontinence on mental health and psychosocial functioning of adolescents with Hirschsprung’s disease and low anorectal anomalies [see comments]. J Pediatr Surg 1998, 33: 468–475.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Aksnes G, Diseth TH, Helseth A, et al.: Appendicostomy for antegrade enema: effects on somatic and psychosocial functioning in children with myelomeningocele. Pediatrics 2002, 109: 484–489. This review shows the outcome of children with myelomeningocele that received and ACE procedure; it is important because it mentions issues related to psychosocial aspects.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Youssef NN, Barksdale Jr E, Griffiths JM, et al.: Management of intractable constipation with antegrade enemas in neurologically intact children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2002, 34: 402–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Malone P: The antegrade continence enema procedure. BJU Int 2004, 93: 248–249.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Lee SL, Rowell S, Greenholz SK: Therapeutic cecostomy tubes in infants with imperforare anus and caudal agenesis. J Pediatr Surg 2002, 37: 345–347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Marshall J, Anticich N, Stanton MP: Antegrade continence enemas in the treatment of slow transit constipation. J Pediatr Surg 2001, 36: 1227–1230.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Pensabene L, Youssef NN, Di Lorenzo C: Success of antegrade enemas in children with functional constipation. Pediatr Med Chir 2003, 25: 126–130.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Chait PG, Shlomovitz E, Connolly BL, et al.: Percutaneous cecostomy: updates in technique and patient care. Radiology 2003, 227: 246–250. Comprehensive review of the issues related to the performance of percutaneous cecostomy.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Dey R, Ferguson C, Kenny SE, et al.: After the honeymoon --medium-term outcome of antegrade continence enema procedure. J Pediatr Surg 2003, 38: 65–68.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Graf JL, Strear C, Bratton B, et al.: The antegrade continence enema procedure: a review of the literature. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 1998, 33: 1294–1296.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Rivera M, Kugathasan S, Berger W, Werlin SL: Percutaneous colonoscopic cecostomy for management of chronic constipation in children. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2001, 53: 225–228. Description of the technique used to perform a percutaneous endoscopic cecostomy.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Meier DE, Foster ME, Guzzetta PC, Coln D: Antegrade continent enema management of chronic fecal incontinence in children. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 1998, 33: 1149–51, discussion 1151–1152.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Wilcox DT, Kiely EM: The Malone (antegrade colonic enema) procedure: early experience. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 1998, 33: 204–206.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Levitt MA, Soffer SZ, Pena A: Continent appendicostomy in the bowel management of fecally incontinent children. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 1997, 32: 1630–1633.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Wedderburn A, Lee RS, Denny A, et al.: Synchronous bladder reconstruction and antegrade continence enema. J Urol 2001, 165: 2392–2393.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Kajbafzadeh AM, Chubak N: Simultaneous Malone antegrade continent enema and Mitrofanoff principle using the divided appendix: report of a new technique for prevention of stoma complications. J Urol 2001, 165: 2404–2409.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Chait PG, Shandling B, Richards HM, Connolly BL: Fecal incontinence in children: treatment with percutaneous cecostomy tube placement--a prospective study [see comments]. Radiology 1997, 203: 621–624.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Churchill BM, De Ugarte DA, Atkinson JB: Left-colon antegrade continence enema (LACE) procedure for fecal incontinence. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 2003, 38: 1778–1780.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Mouriquand P, Mure PY, Feyaerts A, et al.: The left Monti-Malone. BJU Int 2000, 85(Suppl):65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Whineray Kelly E, Bowkett B: Tube sigmoidostomy: a modification of the antegrade colonic evacuation. ANZ Journal of Surgery 2002, 72: 397–399.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Gauderer MW, Decou JM, Boyle JT: Sigmoid irrigation tube for the management of chronic evacuation disorders. Journal of Pediatric Surgery 2002, 37: 348–351. Description of a technique used to create access for sigmoid irrigations. This may represent a new approach for the surgical management of children with fecal incontinence.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Curry JI, Osborne A, Malone PSJ: The MACE procedure: experience in the United Kingdom. J Pediatr Surg 1999, 34: 338–340.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Cheetham MJ, Kamm MA, Phillips RK: Topical phenylephrine increases anal canal resting pressure in patients with faecal incontinence. Gut 2001, 48: 356–359.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Mander BJ, Wexner SD, Williams NS, et al.: Preliminary results of a multicentre trial of the electrically stimulated gracilis neoanal sphincter. Br J Surg 1999, 86: 1543–1548.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Vaizey CJ, Kamm MA, Roy AJ, Nicholls RJ: Double-blind crossover study of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2000, 43: 298–302.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Lehur PA, Roig JV, Duinslaeger M: Artificial anal sphincter: prospective clinical and manometric evaluation. Dis Colon Rectum 2000, 43: 1100–1106.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Malouf AJ, Vaizey CJ, Norton CS, Kamm MA: Internal anal sphincter augmentation for fecal incontinence using injectable silicone biomaterial. Dis Colon Rectum 2001, 44: 595–600.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Hunnewell Ground, 300 Longwood Avenue, 02115, Boston, MA, USA

    Licia Pensabene MD & Samuel Nurko MD, MPH

Authors
  1. Licia Pensabene MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samuel Nurko MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pensabene, L., Nurko, S. Management of fecal incontinence in children without functional fecal retention. Curr Treat Options Gastro 7, 381–390 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-004-0051-z

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11938-004-0051-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation