-
Therapeutische Umschau. Revue... 2021Investigations of Anorectal Function Investigations of anorectal function allows measurement of anal sphincter pressure, evaluation of rectal sensitivity and...
Investigations of Anorectal Function Investigations of anorectal function allows measurement of anal sphincter pressure, evaluation of rectal sensitivity and verification of rectoanal reflexes, which are essential elements in the assessment of bowel emptying. It is combined with a balloon expulsion test to ensure that the manometric findings are consistent with anorectal function. These tests are used in the diagnostic work-up of chronic defecation disorders, constipation and faecal incontinence, but can also provide clarification in the pre- and post-operative setting, for functional anorectal pain and other disorders of pelvic floor function. Most patients referred for investigation of these symptoms require a comprehensive assessment of anorectal structure and function. Because of the high variability of normal values and complexity of anorectal function, no single examination provides all the information needed to make a symptom-explaining, conclusive diagnosis and influence treatment decisions. Anorectal manometry is useful to assess the extent of impairment of anorectal function and to differentiate between organic and functional disorders (including pelvic floor dyssynergia). A preceding detailed anamnesis as well as endoscopic (procto / rectoscopy) and imaging procedures (anorectal endosonography, dynamic MR defecography) complete the diagnostic investigation instead.
Topics: Anal Canal; Constipation; Defecation; Humans; Manometry; Rectum
PubMed: 34704477
DOI: 10.1024/0040-5930/a001304 -
Abdominal Radiology (New York) Apr 2021To compare prevalence and severity of multi-compartment pelvic floor dysfunction between supine magnetic resonance defecography with defecation (MRD) and supine dynamic...
PURPOSE
To compare prevalence and severity of multi-compartment pelvic floor dysfunction between supine magnetic resonance defecography with defecation (MRD) and supine dynamic MRI during Valsalva, both with and without rectal distention.
METHODS
This was an IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant retrospective review of consecutive patients referred for MR Defecography. MRD protocol included imaging at rest, during pre-defecation Valsalva (Pre-DV), defecation (Def), and post-defecation Valsalva (Post-DV). The Post-DV images were performed after complete evacuation either during the defecation acquisition or, in cases where patient was unable to defecate during the examination, in a conventional toilet. Size of cystocele, vaginal prolapse, anorectal (AR) descent, and enterocele were measured on all acquisitions relative to the pubococcygeal line. Rectocele size was recorded in anteroposterior dimension. The presence or absence of rectal intussusception (RI) was documented. The prevalence, absolute size, and grades of prolapse, rectocele, and RI were compared between the acquisitions using pair-wise ANOVA, Friedman, Dunn pair-wise, and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests.
RESULTS
30 patients were included in the final analysis. Higher prevalence of cystocele, vaginal prolapse, enterocele, AR descent grade 2 or higher, rectocele grade 2 or higher, and RI were seen on Def compared to Post-DV and Pre-DV. Cystocele, vaginal prolapse, enterocele, AR descent, and rectocele sizes were significantly larger on Def compared to Post-DV by 0.7-1.95 cm (p ≤ 0.007). Prolapse in all compartments and rectocele size were significantly larger on Def compared to Pre-DV (p < 0.0001). Cystocele, vaginal prolapse, and enterocele sizes were significantly larger on Post-DV compared to Pre-DV (p < 0.0001). There were significant differences in grading of all types of prolapse and rectocele between the various acquisitions of MRD (p < 0.0001). Cystocele, AR descent, and rectocele grades were significantly higher on Def compared to Post-DV (p range ≤ 0.0002). Grading of all types of prolapse and rectocele was significantly higher on Def compared to Pre-DV (p < 0.0001). Cystocele, vaginal prolapse, and enterocele grades were all significantly higher on Post-DV compared to Pre-DV (p ≤ 0.0007).
CONCLUSION
Defecation images during supine MRD elicit higher prevalence and size of prolapse of all pelvic compartments in comparison to both pre- and post-defecation Valsalva images. Post-defecation Valsalva images show larger size of anterior and middle compartment prolapse than pre-defecation Valsalva images. Functional evaluation of pelvic floor dysfunction with MRI should include image acquisition during defecation. If Valsalva images are acquired, these should be performed after the defecation acquisition and without rectal distention.
Topics: Defecation; Defecography; Female; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Pelvic Floor; Retrospective Studies; Valsalva Maneuver
PubMed: 31494706
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-019-02208-8 -
Journal of Pediatric Surgery Jun 2018This letter comments on the recent lecture by Dr. Stephen W. Bickler. He reported that many serious diseases that haunt our society are rare or unknown in the...
This letter comments on the recent lecture by Dr. Stephen W. Bickler. He reported that many serious diseases that haunt our society are rare or unknown in the underdeveloped world. These include appendicitis, IBD, diverticulosis, colorectal cancer, GERD and others. For example, the rate of appendicitis in Gambian children is one-thirtieth the rate of Caucasian children living in the USA. Colon cancer is nearly 15 times as common in black Americans as in Africans. There is a wealth of evidence linking these disparities to a lifestyle factor that was not mentioned by Dr. Bickler: the unnatural method of defecation used in our society. Like all primates, humans were designed to squat for bodily functions. The sitting position sabotages the natural biomechanics of defecation and forces one to use the Valsalva maneuver. How does this increase the risk of appendicitis? The cecum, instead of being squeezed empty by the right thigh when squatting, is actually inflated by the Valsalva maneuver. The increased pressure can push fecal matter into the appendiceal orifice. The back-pressure can also overwhelm the ileocecal valve, contaminating the small intestine. Crohn's Disease develops in the terminal ileum - the area soiled by this toxic backwash.
Topics: Child; Civilization; Defecation; Developing Countries; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Humans; Life Style; Posture
PubMed: 29729822
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2018.02.099 -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Feb 2023Obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) is a clinical syndrome manifest as difficulty in faecal evacuation despite no mechanical obstruction. It is the final clinical... (Review)
Review
Obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) is a clinical syndrome manifest as difficulty in faecal evacuation despite no mechanical obstruction. It is the final clinical pathway of a number of anatomical and physiological pathologies they can result in considerable misery to the lives of the patients it afflicts. Herein, the authors seek to breakdown the syndrome into its component parts, looking first at normal pelvic floor anatomy and physiology; followed by each pathological element; clinical features and investigation; individual management and management of the patient as a whole. It must be stated that correction of anatomy is not the sine qua non, as this does not always correlate to improvement of symptoms. There is a complex interplay of all elements, and a holistic approach appreciating the gestalt principle of "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts" is paramount. Causes of pelvic pain (levator ani syndrome, coccygodynia, proctalgia fugax and pudendal neuralgia) do not fall into ODS and are beyond the scope of this paper.
Topics: Humans; Defecation; Constipation; Gastrointestinal Diseases; Syndrome; Rectocele
PubMed: 36729157
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-02755-1 -
American Journal of Physiology.... Jan 2023The machinery maintaining fecal continence prevents involuntary loss of stool and is based on the synchronized interplay of multiple voluntary and involuntary... (Review)
Review
The machinery maintaining fecal continence prevents involuntary loss of stool and is based on the synchronized interplay of multiple voluntary and involuntary mechanisms, dependent on cooperation between motor responses of the musculature of the colon, pelvic floor, and anorectum, and sensory and motor neural pathways. Knowledge of the physiology of fecal continence is key toward understanding the pathophysiology of fecal incontinence. The idea that involuntary contraction of the internal anal sphincter is the primary mechanism of continence and that the external anal sphincter supports continence only by voluntary contraction is outdated. Other mechanisms have come to the forefront, and they have significantly changed viewpoints on the mechanisms of continence and incontinence. For instance, involuntary contractions of the external anal sphincter, the puborectal muscle, and the sphincter of O'Beirne have been proven to play a role in fecal continence. Also, retrograde propagating cyclic motor patterns in the sigmoid and rectum promote retrograde transit to prevent the continuous flow of content into the anal canal. With this review, we aim to give an overview of primary and secondary mechanisms controlling fecal continence and evaluate the strength of evidence.
Topics: Humans; Defecation; Fecal Incontinence; Rectum; Anal Canal; Colon, Sigmoid
PubMed: 36283962
DOI: 10.1152/ajpgi.00313.2021 -
Abdominal Radiology (New York) Apr 2023We aimed to determine the anorectal physiological factors associated with rectocele formation.
BACKGROUND
We aimed to determine the anorectal physiological factors associated with rectocele formation.
METHODS
Female patients (N = 32) with severe constipation, fecal incontinence, or suspicion of rectocele, who had undergone magnetic resonance defecography and anorectal function tests between 2015 and 2021, were retrospectively included for analysis. The anorectal function tests were used to measure pressure in the anorectum during defecation. Rectocele characteristics and pelvic floor anatomy were determined with magnetic resonance defecography. Constipation severity was determined with the Agachan score. Information regarding constipation-related symptoms was collected.
RESULTS
Mean rectocele size during defecation was 2.14 ± 0.88 cm. During defecation, the mean anal sphincter pressure just before defecation was 123.70 ± 67.37 mm Hg and was associated with rectocele size (P = 0.041). The Agachan constipation score was moderately correlated with anal sphincter pressure just before defecation (r = 0.465, P = 0.022), but not with rectocele size (r = 0.276, P = 0.191). During defecation, increased anal sphincter pressure just before defecation correlated moderately and positively with straining maneuvers (r = 0.539, P = 0.007) and defecation blockage (r = 0.532, P = 0.007). Rectocele size correlated moderately and positively with the distance between the pubococcygeal line and perineum (r = 0.446, P = 0.011).
CONCLUSION
Increased anal sphincter pressure just before defecation is correlated with the rectocele size. Based on these results, it seems important to first treat the increased anal canal pressure before considering surgical rectocele repair to enhance patient outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Female; Rectocele; Defecation; Defecography; Retrospective Studies; Manometry; Constipation
PubMed: 36745205
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-023-03807-2 -
Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 2018Current questionnaires on defecation disorders are often brief and fail to include questions considering causative factors. Furthermore, adult and pediatric...
OBJECTIVES
Current questionnaires on defecation disorders are often brief and fail to include questions considering causative factors. Furthermore, adult and pediatric questionnaires differ, which makes it impossible to monitor defecation disorders during the transition from childhood to adulthood. With these points in mind, we developed the Groningen Defecation and Fecal Continence (DeFeC) questionnaire and its pediatric equivalent, the P-DeFeC. The aim of this paper is to introduce the questionnaires and to assess their feasibility, reproducibility and validity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Various Rome IV criteria and scoring tools for constipation and fecal incontinence were incorporated, resulting in nine categories. Feasibility and reproducibility were assessed by performing a test-retest survey in 100 adult participants. Concurrent validity was assessed in 27 patients and 18 healthy volunteers by comparing questionnaire-based diagnoses of constipation and fecal incontinence to final diagnoses based on anorectal function tests.
RESULTS
There were no remarks on the understandability of any questions. The Cohen's kappa coefficient of all main questions ranged from 0.26 to 1.00, with an average of 0.57. All but one category showed moderate agreement or higher. The sensitivity of the questionnaire-based diagnosis of constipation was 75%; specificity was 100%. The sensitivity of the questionnaire-based diagnosis of fecal incontinence was 77%; specificity was 94%.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall reproducibility of the Groningen DeFeC questionnaire is acceptable and its validity is good. This makes it a feasible screening tool for defecation disorders and, equally important, with these questionnaires defecation disorders can now be monitored during the transition from childhood to adulthood.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Constipation; Defecation; Fecal Incontinence; Female; Healthy Volunteers; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Netherlands; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Surveys and Questionnaires; Young Adult
PubMed: 29703095
DOI: 10.1080/00365521.2018.1465993 -
Clinical Gastroenterology and... Oct 2023Anorectal manometry (ARM) is a comprehensive diagnostic tool for evaluating patients with constipation, fecal incontinence, or anorectal pain; however, it is not widely... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Anorectal manometry (ARM) is a comprehensive diagnostic tool for evaluating patients with constipation, fecal incontinence, or anorectal pain; however, it is not widely utilized for reasons that remain unclear. The aim of this roundtable discussion was to critically examine the current clinical practices of ARM and biofeedback therapy by physicians and surgeons in both academic and community settings.
METHODS
Leaders in medical and surgical gastroenterology and physical therapy with interest in anorectal disorders were surveyed regarding practice patterns and utilization of these technologies. Subsequently, a roundtable was held to discuss survey results, explore current diagnostic and therapeutic challenges with these technologies, review the literature, and generate consensus-based recommendations.
RESULTS
ARM identifies key pathophysiological abnormalities such as dyssynergic defecation, anal sphincter weakness, or rectal sensory dysfunction, and is a critical component of biofeedback therapy, an evidence-based treatment for patients with dyssynergic defecation and fecal incontinence. Additionally, ARM has the potential to enhance health-related quality of life and reduce healthcare costs. However, it has significant barriers that include a lack of education and training of healthcare providers regarding the utility and availability of ARM and biofeedback procedures, as well as challenges with condition-specific testing protocols and interpretation. Additional barriers include understanding when to perform, where to refer, and how to use these technologies, and confusion over billing practices.
CONCLUSIONS
Overcoming these challenges with appropriate education, training, collaborative research, and evidence-based guidelines for ARM testing and biofeedback therapy could significantly enhance patient care of anorectal disorders.
Topics: Humans; Fecal Incontinence; Defecation; Quality of Life; Manometry; Constipation; Rectum; Rectal Diseases; Anal Canal; Biofeedback, Psychology
PubMed: 37302444
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2023.05.025 -
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy 2016Chronic constipation is a global problem affecting all ages and associated with considerable morbidity and significant financial burden for society. Though formerly... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Chronic constipation is a global problem affecting all ages and associated with considerable morbidity and significant financial burden for society. Though formerly defined on the basis of a single symptom, infrequent defecation; constipation is now viewed as a syndrome encompassing several complaints such as difficulty with defecation, a sense of incomplete evacuation, hard stools, abdominal discomfort and bloating.
AREAS COVERED
The expanded concept of constipation has inevitably led to a significant change in outcomes in clinical trials, as well as in patient expectations from new therapeutic interventions. The past decades have also witnessed a proliferation in therapeutic targets for new agents. Foremost among these have been novel prokinetics, a new category, prosecretory agents and innovative approaches such as inhibitors of bile salt transport. In contrast, relatively few effective therapies exist for the management of those anorectal and pelvic floor problems that result in difficult defecation.
EXPERT OPINION
Though constipation is a common and often troublesome disorder, many of those affected can resolve their symptoms with relatively simple measures. For those with more resistant symptoms a number of novel, effective and safe options now exist. Those with defecatory difficulty (anismus, pelvic floor dysfunction) continue to represent a significant management challenge.
Topics: Chronic Disease; Constipation; Defecation; Humans; Microbiota
PubMed: 26630260
DOI: 10.1517/14656566.2016.1127356 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2024Constipation that is prolonged and does not resolve with conventional therapeutic measures is called intractable constipation. The treatment of intractable constipation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Constipation that is prolonged and does not resolve with conventional therapeutic measures is called intractable constipation. The treatment of intractable constipation is challenging, involving pharmacological or non-pharmacological therapies, as well as surgical approaches. Unresolved constipation can negatively impact quality of life, with additional implications for health systems. Consequently, there is an urgent need to identify treatments that are efficacious and safe.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatments used for intractable constipation in children.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers up to 23 June 2023. We also searched reference lists of included studies for relevant studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any pharmacological, non-pharmacological, or surgical treatment to placebo or another active comparator, in participants aged between 0 and 18 years with functional constipation who had not responded to conventional medical therapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were symptom resolution, frequency of defecation, treatment success, and adverse events; secondary outcomes were stool consistency, painful defecation, quality of life, faecal incontinence frequency, abdominal pain, hospital admission for disimpaction, and school absence. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each primary outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included 10 RCTs with 1278 children who had intractable constipation. We assessed one study as at low risk of bias across all domains. There were serious concerns about risk of bias in six studies. One study compared the injection of 160 units botulinum toxin A (n = 44) to unspecified oral stool softeners (n = 44). We are very uncertain whether botulinum toxin A injection improves treatment success (risk ratio (RR) 37.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.31 to 257.94; very low certainty evidence, downgraded due to serious concerns with risk of bias and imprecision). Frequency of defecation was reported only for the botulinum toxin A injection group (mean interval of 2.6 days). The study reported no data for the other primary outcomes. One study compared erythromycin estolate (n = 6) to placebo (n = 8). The only primary outcome reported was adverse events, which were 0 in both groups. The evidence is of very low certainty due to concerns with risk of bias and serious imprecision. One study compared 12 or 24 μg oral lubiprostone (n = 404) twice a day to placebo (n = 202) over 12 weeks. There may be little to no difference in treatment success (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.92; low certainty evidence). We also found that lubiprostone probably results in little to no difference in adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.21; moderate certainty evidence). The study reported no data for the other primary outcomes. One study compared three-weekly rectal sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate and sorbitol enemas (n = 51) to 0.5 g/kg/day polyethylene glycol laxatives (n = 51) over a 52-week period. We are very uncertain whether rectal sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate and sorbitol enemas improve treatment success (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.14; very low certainty evidence, downgraded due to serious concerns with risk of bias and imprecision). Results of defecation frequency per week was reported only as modelled means using a linear mixed model. The study reported no data for the other primary outcomes. One study compared biofeedback therapy (n = 12) to no intervention (n = 12). We are very uncertain whether biofeedback therapy improves symptom resolution (RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.08 to 5.79; very low certainty evidence, downgraded due to serious concerns with risk of bias and imprecision). The study reported no data for the other primary outcomes. One study compared 20 minutes of intrarectal electromotive botulinum toxin A using 2800 Hz frequency and botulinum toxin A dose 10 international units/kg (n = 30) to 10 international units/kg botulinum toxin A injection (n = 30). We are very uncertain whether intrarectal electromotive botulinum toxin A improves symptom resolution (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.22; very low certainty evidence) or if it increases the frequency of defecation (mean difference (MD) 0.00, 95% CI -1.87 to 1.87; very low certainty evidence). We are also very uncertain whether intrarectal electromotive botulinum toxin A has an improved safety profile (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.00; very low certainty evidence). The evidence for these results is of very low certainty due to serious concerns with risk of bias and imprecision. The study did not report data on treatment success. One study compared the injection of 60 units botulinum toxin A (n = 21) to myectomy of the internal anal sphincter (n = 21). We are very uncertain whether botulinum toxin A injection improves treatment success (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.34; very low certainty evidence). No adverse events were recorded. The study reported no data for the other primary outcomes. One study compared 0.04 mg/kg oral prucalopride (n = 107) once daily to placebo (n = 108) over eight weeks. Oral prucalopride probably results in little or no difference in defecation frequency (MD 0.50, 95% CI -0.06 to 1.06; moderate certainty evidence); treatment success (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.72; moderate certainty evidence); and adverse events (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.39; moderate certainty evidence). The study did not report data on symptom resolution. One study compared transcutaneous electrical stimulation to sham stimulation, and another study compared dietitian-prescribed Mediterranean diet with written instructions versus written instructions. These studies did not report any of our predefined primary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We identified low to moderate certainty evidence that oral lubiprostone may result in little to no difference in treatment success and adverse events compared to placebo. Based on moderate certainty evidence, there is probably little or no difference between oral prucalopride and placebo in defecation frequency, treatment success, or adverse events. For all other comparisons, the certainty of the evidence for our predefined primary outcomes is very low due to serious concerns with study limitations and imprecision. Consequently, no robust conclusions could be drawn.
Topics: Humans; Constipation; Child; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Child, Preschool; Adolescent; Defecation; Botulinum Toxins, Type A; Quality of Life; Laxatives; Infant; Bias; Lubiprostone
PubMed: 38895907
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014580.pub2