THE MACEDO-MALONE ANTEGRADE CONTINENCE ENEMAPROCEDURE: EARLY EXPERIENCE
ADRIANO ALMEIDA CALADO,* ANTONIO MACEDO, JR., UBIRAJARA BARROSO, JR.,JOSE MURILLO NETTO, RIBERTO LIGUORI, MAURICIO HACHUL, GILMAR GARRONE,
VALDEMAR ORTIZ AND MIGUEL SROUGIFrom the Department of Urology, Division of Pediatric Urology, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil
Purpose: The successful treatment of fecal incontinence can dramatically improve the qualityof life of affected children. The introduction of the Malone antegrade continence enema providesthe opportunity to manage previously resistant cases. However, using the appendix to create thiscatheterizable channel is not always possible, and the duration of these antegrade enemas is asource of concern for the patients. We describe a new approach to create left continent colonicaccess to shorten the duration of these enemas, and report the experience gained from the first9 cases managed at our institution.Materials and Methods: During a 5-year period 9 patients underwent a Macedo-Malone
antegrade continence enema at our institution. Incontinence was associated with myelomenin-gocele in 7 patients and anorectal malformation in 2. The antegrade continence enema procedureis begun by isolating a 2 cm flap in a tenia on the left colon (spleen flexure). A 12Fr silicone Foleycatheter is placed on the mucosal surface of the flap to allow tubularization of the plate withinterrupted polyglycolic acid 3-zero transverse sutures, creating an efferent tubular conduit.Antegrade colonic washouts were started 2 weeks after surgery with saline solution or tap waterin all patients.Results: Followup of our 9 cases ranged from 8 to 33 months (average 20.7). Enema volume
varied from 250 to 800 ml, with administration taking from 45 to 60 minutes, and colonicevacuation occurred within 30 to 60 minutes of enema administration. Of the 9 patients 8 werecompletely continent and 1 was partially continent. Four patients experienced difficulty withcatheterization initially because of stenosis of the stomal track. The affected stomas were dilated,which was successful in 1 case. Three patients subsequently required stomal revision.Conclusions: The Macedo-Malone procedure is a relatively straightforward operative approach
providing an effective washout technique that is acceptable to parents and children.KEY WORDS: fecal incontinence, enema, colorectal surgery
Problems with the gastrointestinal and urinary tracts fre-quently coexist. They may be part of a complex congenitalabnormality or may share a common cause such as neurop-athy, or an abnormality in one system may affect the other.The pediatric urologist may be aware of these gastrointesti-nal anomalies and be conversant with their clinical presen-tation, management and prognosis.1
The development of the continent catheterizable appendi-cocecostomy as described by Malone et al in 1990 allowedthe administration of an antegrade continence enema(MACE) for patients with fecal incontinence not responsiveto more conservative measures.2 Failure rates of up to 50%have been described but it is not clear why the MACEfails.3 Washout failure is the most common overall cause offailure, defined as failure to pass any or passage of little of theenema from the rectum within 1 to 2 hours of lavage. Anotherfrequently related complication is pain in the form of colic,which occurs during washout.The MACE often is long and tedious for handicapped pa-
tients, as the volume of washout from the cecum to therectum is large, especially in neuropathic bowels prone todolichosigmoid. To resolve this problem, Liloku et al de-scribed a technique to create left continent colonic access toshorten the duration of these enemas.4 In this technique a
segment of descending colon 1.5 to 2 cm wide is isolated withits blood supply, and aMonti tube is fashioned and implantedinto the left colon according to the Malone technique.Macedo and Srougi in 2000 described a continent catheter-
izable ileum based reservoir in which a catheterizable con-duit could be created in continuity with the augmented seg-ment.5 The Macedo-Malone procedure incorporates some ofthe same principles that have proved reliable in urinarydiversion. We believe that our procedure in the left colon maysignificantly decrease the time required for enema adminis-tration and washout, thereby increasing patient satisfactionand compliance. We report our experience with the Macedo-Malone antegrade continence enema procedure in 9 patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Nine patients at our institution were eligible for theMacedo-Malone procedure based on fecal incontinence notresponsive to previous attempts of conservative medicaltreatment between 1999 and 2003. We defined the use of theleft colon as a concept and no further radiological investiga-tion was considered in the decision to conduct this procedure.The underlying diagnosis in these patients was myelomen-ingocele in 7 and anorectal abnormalities in 2. In all patientsdietary modifications and medical treatment of fecal inconti-nence had failed, including various combinations of laxatives,rectal stimulation, suppositories and enemas.
Submitted for publication August 8, 2004.* Correspondence: Rua Tres de Maio, 17/31, Sao PauloSP, Brazil
04044020 (e-mail: email@example.com).
0022-5347/05/1734-1340/0 Vol. 173, 13401344, April 2005THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY Printed in U.S.A.Copyright 2005 by AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000149678.36915.fe
As described by Macedo et al, the antegrade continenceenema procedure is begun by isolating a 3 cm flap in a teniaon the left colon (spleen flexure, fig. 1, A).6, 7 A 12Fr siliconeFoley catheter is placed on the mucosal surface of the flap toallow tubularization of the plate with interrupted polygly-colic acid 3-zero transverse sutures (fig. 1, B), creating anefferent tubular conduit (fig. 1, C). The continence valvemechanism is produced by embedding the tube over a serouslined extramural tunnel created by interrupted 3-zeropolypropylene sutures (figs. 1, D and 2). The distal end of thetube is anastomosed into a V shape to the skin flap to avoidstomal stenosis. A catheter is left indwelling in the conduitfor 3 weeks, through which enema administration begins 7 to10 days postoperatively.All of the children were followed for a minimum of 6
months after surgery to determine the success of the proce-dure. Subsequent information regarding the outcome of theprocedure and patient satisfaction was obtained by patient/parent interview using a questionnaire developed at our cen-ter (see Appendix). This questionnaire evaluates success ofthe surgical technique (measuring ease of catheterizationand speed of completion of colonic washout), rate of conti-nence and overall improvement in quality of life.
Enema volume varied from 250 to 800 ml, with adminis-tration taking from 45 to 60 minutes. In the majority of
patients colonic evacuation occurred within 30 to 60 minutesof enema administration (fig. 3). Enemas were given oncedaily in 7 patients, with the 2 remaining patients requiringcolonic washout every other day. Of the 9 patients 8 werecompletely continent and 1 was partially continent. We de-fine complete continence of stool as the lack of daytime and
FIG. 1. Surgical technique. A, isolation of the flap on left colon. B, Foley catheters placed on mucosal surface of flap. C, tubularization ofplate creating efferent tubular conduit. D, continence valve mechanism is created.
FIG. 2. End aspect of Macedo-Malone procedure
MACEDO-MALONE ANTEGRADE CONTINENCE ENEMA PROCEDURE 1341
nighttime fecal soiling. Postoperative irrigation regimensand patient outcome are detailed in table 1.The majority of complications involved the stoma, most
commonly stomal stenosis. Four patients experienced diffi-culty with catheterization initially because of stenosis of thestomal track. The affected stomas were dilated, which wassuccessful in 1 case. Three patients subsequently requiredstomal revision.Followup of our 9 cases ranged from 8 to 33 months (aver-
age 20.7). All patients except one indicated that the Macedo-Malone procedure was superior to medical treatment andthat it had significantly improved their quality of life. Theonly patient who reported dissatisfaction with the procedure(patient 7) was a female teenager with gas leakage duringand after the enema. She became increasingly depressed and
noncompliant. She declined to administer the enemas herself4 months after surgery.
Pediatric urologists are often involved in the care of chil-dren who not only have urinary incontinence, but also haveproblems of fecal elimination. In this series we offered in thedescribed procedure to treat fecal incontinence in associationwith urinary tract reconstruction only when maximal medi-cal treatment (diet, medications, enema) had failed. Tradi-tionally the only surgical option available at this point is theantegrade continence enema. There have been numerousoperative modifications since the procedure was first de-scribed by Malone et al.2 Regardless of technique, the Maloneantegrade continence enema has dramatically improved thequality of life for patients with fecal incontinence.8
In the MACE the enema given differs from center to center.The most common regimen uses a phosphate enema. Caremust be taken when using phosphate because toxicity mayoccur if it is retained, and this is a potentially life threateningcomplication.Enema volume and frequency must be individualized to
each patient. Although in the Malone procedure almost all ofthe patients administer an enema containing phosphate fol-lowed by smaller volumes of saline solution, our patientshave had success using tap water or saline solution with nometaboli