Ostomy continence devices: a systematic review of the literature and meta‐analysis

Abstract

AbstractAimColostomy complication rates range widely from 10% to 70%. The psychological burden on patients, leading to lifestyle changes and decreased quality of life (QoL), is one of the largest factors. The aim of this work was to assess the history and efficacy of ostomy continence devices in improving continence and QoL.MethodIn this PRISMA‐compliant systematic review and meta‐analysis, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar and clinicaltrials.gov for studies on continence devices for all ostomies up to April 2023. Primary outcomes were continence and improvement in QoL. Secondary outcomes were leakage, patient's device preference and complications. Risk of Bias 2 and the revised tool to assess risk of bias in non‐randomized studies of interventions (ROBINS‐1) were used to assess risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was graded using GRADE.ResultsTwenty‐two studies assessed devices from 1978 to 2022. The two main types identified were ball‐valve devices and plug systems. Conseal and Vitala were the two main devices with significant evidence allowing for pooled analyses. Conseal, the only currently marketed device, had a pooled rate of continence of 67.4%, QoL improvement was 74.9%, patient preference over a traditional appliance was 69.1%, leakage was 10.1% and complications was 13.7%. Since 2011, five studies have investigated experimental devices on both human and animal models.ConclusionOstomy continence has been a long‐standing goal without a consistently reliable solution. We propose that selective and short‐term usage of continence devices may lead to improved continence and QoL in ostomy patients. Further research is needed to develop a reliable daily device for ostomy continence. Future investigation should include the needs of ileostomates.