Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) is a potential treatment for constipation refractory to standard therapies. However, there have been no randomized controlled studies examining its efficacy. In patients with slow transit constipation, we evaluated the efficacy of suprasensory and subsensory SNS compared with sham, in a prospective, 18-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-phase crossover study. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients who, on more than 2 days/week for at least 2 of 3 weeks, reported a bowel movement associated with a feeling of complete evacuation. After 3 weeks of temporary peripheral nerve evaluation (PNE), all patients had permanent implantation and were randomized to subsensory/sham (3 weeks each) and then re-randomized to suprasensory/sham (3 weeks each) with a 2-week washout period between each arm. Daily stool dairies were kept, and quality of life (QoL; SF36) was measured at the end of each arm. Between November 2006 and March 2012, 234 constipated patients were assessed, of whom 59 were willing and deemed eligible to participate (4 male; median age 42 years). Of the 59 patients, 16 (28%) responded to PNE. Fifty-five patients went on to permanent SNS implantation. The proportion of patients satisfying the primary outcome measure did not differ between suprasensory (30%) and sham (21%) stimulations, nor between subsensory (25%) and sham (25%) stimulations. There were no significant changes in QoL scores. In patients with refractory slow transit constipation, SNS did not improve the frequency of complete bowel movements over the 3-week active period.

Background Sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) is an effective treatment for neurogenic faecal incontinence (FI). However, the clinical improvement that patients experience cannot be explained adequately by changes in anorectal function. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of SNS on colonic propagating sequences (PSs) in patients with FI in whom urgency and incontinence was the predominant symptom. Methods In patients with FI a high‐resolution fibre‐optic manometry catheter, containing 90 sensors spaced at 1‐cm intervals, was positioned colonoscopically and clipped to the caecum. A unipolar or quadripolar tined electrode was implanted into the S3 sacral nerve foramen. Colonic manometry was evaluated in a double‐blind randomized crossover trial, using true suprasensory stimulation or sham stimulation. Each stimulation period, lasting 2 h, was preceded by a 2‐h basal manometric recording. Results All 11 patients studied showed a colonic response to SNS. In ten patients there was a significant increase in the frequency of retrograde PSs throughout the colon during true stimulation compared with sham stimulation (P = 0·014). In one outlier, with baseline retrograde PS frequency nine times that of the nearest patient, a reduction in retrograde PS frequency was recorded. Compared with sham stimulation, SNS had no effect on the frequency of antegrade PSs or high‐amplitude PSs. Conclusion SNS modulates colonic motility in patients with faecal urge incontinence. These data suggest that SNS may improve continence and urgency through alteration of colonic motility, particularly by increasing retrograde PSs in the left colon.