Sacral nerve stimulation in the treatment of bowel dysfunction from imperforate anus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Bowel dysfunction (fecal incontinence and constipation) presents in over 50% of patients after treatment of congenital anal malformations. Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) for the treatment of fecal incontinence improves function in the majority of patients. We present a case report of the treatment of bowel dysfunction with sacral nerve stimulation in a patient with a history of an imperforate anus. PRESENTATION OF CASE: A twenty year-old female with a history of imperforate anus at birth, repaired during infancy with anorectoplasty, presented with fecal incontinence and constipation. Since childhood, she had been suffering from intermittent constipation with worsening fecal incontinence in early adulthood. Examination revealed mild anal stenosis and mucosal prolapse. Endoanal ultrasound demonstrated intact internal and external sphincter with low resting and squeeze pressures on anal manometry. Flexible sigmoidoscopy was normal. The patient underwent permanent sacral nerve stimulation with a primary goal of improvement in continence and, secondarily, for the alleviation of intermittent chronic constipation. DISCUSSION: At 15 month follow-up, the patient had improvement in fecal incontinence (CCIS of 14 pre-SNS to 1 post-SNS), constipation (CCCS of 28 pre-SNS to 20 post-SNS), and quality of life (FIQOL improved in lifestyle (3.7), coping/behavior (3.4), self perception (3.9), and social embarrassment (4.5). CONCLUSION: Sacral nerve stimulation for the treatment of bowel dysfunction in adults secondary to imperforate anus can be performed safely and with good results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".