Clinical effectiveness of subsensory sacral neuromodulation in adults with faecal incontinence: the SUBSoNIC crossover RCT and mechanistic study
Authors: Vollebregt Paul F , Goh Yan Li , Chan Claire L , Dudding Thomas , Furlong Paul , Hamdy Shaheen , Haviland Joanne , Hooper Richard , Jones James , McAlees Eleanor , Norton Christine , O’Connell P Ronan , Scott S Mark , Stevens Natasha , Tubby Kerry , Worthen Sian , Wong Yuk Lam , Knowles Charles H 
Published: June 2024

Trial design
Randomised, multicentre, double-blind crossover trial (with 2 × 16-week periods) of active neurostimulation versus sham stimulation with subsequent open-label follow-up to 58 weeks. Embedded mechanistic sub-study using magnetoencephalography to study bidirectional functional connectivity between brain and anorectum.

Methods
Participants: adults aged 18–80 years, with chronic symptoms of faecal incontinence refractory to first-line treatments (and meeting national criteria for sacral neuromodulation). Interventions: active: chronic, subsensory (low amplitude) stimulation of a mixed sacral nerve (usually S3) using a commercially available surgically implanted pulse generator; sham: identical implant but turned off (or to 0.05 V). Patient-chosen sub- or supra-sensory open-label stimulation from week 32 to week 58. Primary objectives: (1) to determine whether sub-sensory sacral neuromodulation led to a reduction in total faecal incontinence episodes per week compared to sham stimulation; (2) to identify whether clinical responses to sub-sensory sacral neuromodulation were biologically related to changes in evoked and induced activity between the brain and anorectum. Primary outcome: total faecal incontinence episodes per week based on paper bowel diary performed in the final 4 weeks of each crossover period (allowing 12-week washout). Randomised allocation (1 : 1) to arm 1 (sacral neuromodulation/sham) or arm 2 (sham/sacral neuromodulation) at time of surgery was stratified by sex and centre. Blinding: participants, surgeons and assessors; tamper-proof tape masked stimulation settings. Statistical methods: Poisson regression models failed to converge for the count outcomes, hence paired t-tests were used, and treatment effects summarised by mean differences [with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)]. Sample size: a total of 90 patients (45 per group) were required to detect a 30% reduction in episodes, allowing for 10% loss to follow-up (alpha = 0.05; power 90%).

Results
Recruitment: a total of 39 patients of 220 screened and 65 pre-enrolled (arm 1: N = 17; arm 2: N = 22) were recruited to the crossover trial at nine sites from the United Kingdom and one site from Ireland between February 2018 and July 2022, of whom only 16 (arm 1: N = 9; arm 2: N = 7) had complete primary outcome data. Nineteen completed follow-up to 58 weeks. Trial delivery was severely affected and terminated early due to COVID-19. Main barriers were the inability to continue face-to-face patient visits, redeployment of research staff to COVID-19 facing clinical roles and cancelling of sacral neuromodulation procedures due to lack of priority for non-urgent surgery. A total of 25 patients underwent magnetoencephalography studies compared to 20 healthy volunteers. Primary outcome (N = 16): sacral neuromodulation conferred a non-significant reduction in mean faecal incontinence episodes per week compared to sham (−0.7, 95% CI −1.5 to 0.0; p = 0.06). Secondary outcomes: in participants who also used the e-event recorder to record the number of faecal incontinence episodes in both periods (n = 7), estimate of effect size was greater but less precise (−1.5, −3.5 to +0.5; p = 0.12). Data suggested successful allocation concealment. Improvements were observed in faecal incontinence symptoms in the follow-up cohort (at 58 weeks) compared to baseline (approx. 3 fewer faecal incontinence episodes per week). A small number of expected adverse events all resolved. Magnetoencephalography studies demonstrated bidirectional afferent evoked cortical and efferent induced anal activity that did not vary greatly from control subjects (n = 20) and appeared unchanged by sacral neuromodulation.

Conclusions
Due to under-recruitment it is important to interpret the findings on the experimental efficacy of sacral neuromodulation as exploratory. Effects on symptoms observed during double-blinded crossover point to some efficacy over sham, though not large in comparison with placebo responses. The magnitude of effect was highly dependent on method and interpretation of event recording.

Study registration
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN98760715.

Funding
This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme (NIHR award ref: 14/144/08) and is published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 11, No. 19. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.