Advertisement

Techniques in Coloproctology

, Volume 23, Issue 7, pp 675–680 | Cite as

The anatomy of Trans-Obturator Posterior Anal Sling (TOPAS) and dynamics of potential mechanism of action

  • J. Alshiek
  • P. Rosenblatt
  • S. A. ShobeiriEmail author
Original Article
  • 38 Downloads

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate the course of the transobturator posterior anal sling and its relationship to anatomical structures.

Methods

The transobturator anal sling procedure was performed in four fresh-frozen pelvises. The pelvises were dissected and the structures adjacent to the sling and the course of the sling were identified and measurements obtained.

Results

The transobturator posterior anal sling was inserted 2 ± 0.5 cm posteriorly to the anus, and 2.5 ± 0.5 cm caudal to the coccyx under the levator plate at the level of the puborectalis muscle. The tape was 3.5 ± 0.5 cm from the pubic symphysis and 2.3 ± 0.3 cm from the obturator canal at entry into the pelvic cavity. The tape passed 2.3 ± 0.3 cm inferior–medial to the obturator canal. At entry, the sling passed lateral to the ischiopubic ramus through the following structures: gracilis, adductor brevis, obturator externus, obturator membrane, and beneath the obturator internus muscle. The sling traveled 2–3 ± 0.5 cm over the iliococcygeus muscle and perforated the iliococcygeus fibers 0–2 cm medial to arcus tendinous levator ani. The posterior division of the obturator nerve was 2.8 ± 0.7 cm from the tape. The anterior division of the obturator nerve was 3.4 ± 0.8 cm from the tape. The device passed 1.1 ± 0.4 cm from the most medial branch of the obturator vessels.

Conclusions

The transobturator posterior anal sling travels mostly in the avascular area of the ischiorectal fossa and posterior to the puborectalis muscle as intended.

Keywords

Anatomy Anal sling Transobturator posterior anal sling Fecal incontinence 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the assistance of the team at INOVA Advanced Surgical Technology and Education Center (ASTEC) and thank Mr. Larry Walker, the director of the program for his support of this study.

Author contributions

J. Alshiek: Project development, data collection, statistical analysis, manuscript writing. Peter Rosenblatt: Project development, manuscript review. S. A. Shobeiri: Project development, data collection, statistical analysis, manuscript writing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Dr. Peter Rosenblatt is the inventor of the transobturator posterior anal sling the other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This was an anatomical observational study that was approved as an exempt study at Inova Fairfax Hospital.

Informed consent

For this type of the study, formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    C Norton (2009) Conservative and pharmacological management of faecal incontinence in adults. Incontinence 1321–1386Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Macmillan AK, Merrie AE, Marshall RJ, Parry BR (2004) The prevalence of fecal incontinence in community-dwelling adults: a systematic review of the literature. Dis Colon Rectum 47(9):1341–1349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown H, Wexner S, Segall M, Brezoczky K, Lukacz E (2012) Accidental bowel leakage in the mature women’s health study: prevalence and predictors. Int J Clin Pract 66(11):1101–1108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Whitehead WE, Borrud L, Goode PS, Meikle S, Mueller ER, Tuteja A et al (2009) Fecal incontinence in US adults: epidemiology and risk factors. Gastroenterology 137(2):512–517 e2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Melville JL, Fan M-Y, Newton K, Fenner D (2005) Fecal incontinence in US women: a population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193(6):2071–2076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Markland AD, Goode PS, Burgio KL, Redden DT, Richter HE, Sawyer P et al (2010) Incidence and risk factors for fecal incontinence in black and white older adults: a population-based study. J Am Geriatr Soc 58(7):1341–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wu JM, Vaughan CP, Goode PS, Redden DT, Burgio KL, Richter HE et al (2014) Prevalence and trends of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. Obstet Gynecol 123(1):141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johanson JF, Lafferty J (1996) Epidemiology of fecal incontinence: the silent affliction. Am J Gastroenterol 91(1):33–36Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bliss DZ, Fischer LR, Savik K (2005) Managing fecal incontinence: self-care practices of older adults. J Gerontol Nurs 31(7):35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Landefeld CS, Bowers BJ, Feld AD, Hartmann KE, Hoffman E, Ingber MJ et al (2008) National institutes of health state-of-the-science conference statement: prevention of fecal and urinary incontinence in adults. Ann Intern Med 148(6):449–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miner PB Jr (2004) Economic and personal impact of fecal and urinary incontinence. Gastroenterology 126:S8–S13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mellgren A, Matzel K, Pollack J, Hull T, Bernstein M, Graf W et al (2014) Long-term efficacy of NASHA Dx injection therapy for treatment of fecal incontinence. Neurogastroenterol Motil 26(8):1087–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Matzel K, Stadelmaie U, Gall F, Hohenfellner M (1995) Electrical stimulation of sacral spinal nerves for treatment of faecal incontinence. Lancet 346(8983):1124–1127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wexner SD, Coller JA, Devroede G, Hull T, McCallum R, Chan M et al (2010) Sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence: results of a 120-patient prospective multicenter study. Ann Surg 251(3):441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wong WD, Congliosi SM, Spencer MP, Corman ML, Tan P, Opelka FG et al (2002) The safety and efficacy of the artificial bowel sphincter for fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 45(9):1139–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hotouras A, Murphy J, Walsh U, Allison M, Curry A, Williams NS et al (2014) Outcome of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) for fecal incontinence: a prospective cohort study. Ann Surg 259(5):939–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosenblatt P, Schumacher J, Lucente V, McNevin S, Rafferty J, Mellgren A (2014) A preliminary evaluation of the TOPAS system for the treatment of fecal incontinence in women. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 20(3):155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mellgren A, Zutshi M, Lucente VR, Culligan P, Fenner DE, Chern H et al (2016) A posterior anal sling for fecal incontinence results of a 152-patient prospective multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 214(3):349 e1–e8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    DeLancey JO (1988) Structural aspects of the extrinsic continence mechanism. Obstet Gynecol 72(3 Pt 1):296–301Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    DeLANCEY JO (1986) Correlative study of paraurethral anatomy. Obstet Gynecol 68(1):91–97Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oelrich TM (1983) The striated urogenital sphincter muscle in the female. Anat Rec 205(2):223–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shobeiri SA, Gasser RF, Chesson RR, Echols KT (2003) The anatomy of midurethral slings and dynamics of neurovascular injury. Int Urogynecol J 14(3):185–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brochard C, Queralto M, Cabarrot P, Siproudhis L, Portier G (2017) Technique of the transobturator puborectal sling in fecal incontinence. Tech Coloproctol 21(4):315–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyINOVA Women’s HospitalFalls ChurchUSA
  2. 2.Urogynecology and Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery UnitHarvard Medical SchoolCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.Department of Bioengineering and Biomedical EngineeringGeorge Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA
  4. 4.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyHillel Yaffe HospitalHaderaIsrael

Personalised recommendations