Relationship between results of radiological pelvic floor study and anorectal manometry in patients consulting for constipation

Diagnostic testing for dyssynergic defecation in chronic constipation: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dyssynergic defecation (DD) results from inadequate relaxation of the pelvic floor on attempted defecation. The prevalence of DD in patients with chronic constipation (CC) is not certain. Aims of this study are to estimate the prevalence of abnormal findings associated with DD across testing modalities in patients referred for physiological testing for CC.

METHODS

Systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PUBMED databases were conducted. We included full manuscripts reporting DD prevalence in CC, and specific findings at pelvic floor diagnostic tests. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled DD prevalences (with 95% CI) according to individual tests and specific findings.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 79 studies on 7581 CC patients were included. The median prevalence of any single abnormal finding associated with DD was 37.2%, ranging from 14.9% (95% CI 7.9-26.3) for absent opening of the anorectal angle (ARA) on defecography to 52.9% (95% CI 44.3-61.3) for a dyssynergic pattern on ultrasound. The prevalence of a dyssynergic pattern on manometry was 47.7% (95% CI 39.5-56.1). The prevalence of DD was similar across specialty and geographic area as well as when restricting to studies using Rome criteria to define constipation.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Dyssynergic defecation is highly prevalent in CC and is commonly detected across testing modalities, type of patient referred, and geographical regions. We believe that the lower prevalence of findings associated with DD by defecography supports use of manometry and balloon expulsion testing as an initial evaluation for CC.

Evaluation of pelvic descent disorders by dynamic contrast roentgenography

PURPOSE

For precise diagnosis and rational treatment of the increasing number of patients with descent of intrapelvic organ(s) and anatomic plane(s), dynamic contrast roentgenography of multiple intrapelvic organs and planes is described.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients, consisting of 11 males, with a mean age (+/- standard deviation) of 65.6+/-14.2 years and with chief complaints of intrapelvic organ and perineal descent or defecation problems, were examined in this study. Dynamic contrast roentgenography was obtained by opacifying the ileum, urinary bladder, vagina, rectum, and the perineum. Films were taken at both squeeze and strain phases. On the films the lowest points of each organ and plane were plotted, and the distances from the standard line drawn at the upper surface of the sacrum were measured. The values were corrected to percentages according to the height of the sacrococcygeal bone of each patient. From these corrected values, organ or plane descents at strain and squeeze were diagnosed and graphically demonstrated as a descentgram in each patient.

RESULTS

Among 17 cases with subjective symptoms of bladder descent, 9 cases (52.9 percent) showed roentgenographic descent. By the same token, among the cases with subjective feeling of descent of the vagina, uterus, peritoneum, perineum, rectum, and anus, roentgenographic descent was confirmed in 15 of 20 (75 percent), 7 of 9 (77.8 percent), 6 of 16 (37.5 percent), 33 of 33 (100 percent), 25 of 37 (67.6 percent), and 22 of 36 (61.6 percent), respectively. The descentgrams were divided into three patterns: anorectal descent type, female genital descent type, and total organ descent type.

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic contrast roentgenography and successive descentgraphy of multiple intrapelvic organs and planes are useful for objective diagnosis and rational treatment of patients with descent disorders of the intrapelvic organ(s) and plane(s).

Results of pudendal nerve neurolysis-transposition in twelve patients suffering from pudendal neuralgia

PURPOSE

Pudendal neuralgia caused by nerve compression may be improved by surgical decompression of the pudendal nerve. This study was undertaken to determine if clinical symptoms, electrophysiological investigations, and the efficacy of preoperative pudendal nerve blocks could be used to predict the efficacy of surgery.

METHODS

Twelve consecutive patients complaining of anal pain, genital pain, or both, exacerbated in the sitting position and unsuccessfully treated by analgesic drugs before referral were studied. In these 12 patients decompression of the pudendal nerve was performed after unsuccessful CT-guided injection of corticosteroids in the pudendal nerve at the ischial spine or after pain relapse following successful injections. Nineteen nerves were decompressed by surgery, and the compressed area was located between the sacrospinal and sacrotuberal ligaments for 18 nerves.

RESULTS

Three months after surgery, four patients were totally relieved, and three were only partially improved. After 21 months of follow-up, three patients were cured, one was slightly improved, and eight remained in pain. In the three patients cured by surgery, pain completely disappeared for at least two weeks after a nerve block repeated twice before surgery, whereas pain relief was observed in only one of the nine other patients (P = 0.018). None of the three patients cured by surgery were being treated for depression, whereas six of the nine remaining patients were receiving antidepressants or were followed by a psychiatrist (P = 0.09). Results of surgery did not depend on other preoperative clinical or electrophysiological data.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary study suggests that complete disappearance of pain for at least two weeks after a nerve block repeated twice before surgery may be the best criterion to predict success. Based on this criterion, surgery would have been performed in four patients in this study, of whom three would have been cured.

How accurate is clinical examination in diagnosing and quantifying pelvirectal disorders? A prospective study in a group of 50 patients complaining of defecatory difficulties

We prospectively evaluated 50 patients (38 females and 12 males; mean age, 44.7 +/- 15 years) who complained of defecatory difficulties to determine the accuracy of the clinical examination in diagnosing and quantifying pelvirectal abnormalities. Each parameter was then compared with the features of anorectal manometry and evacuation proctography performed by two independent observers. Global agreement between clinical diagnosis and the reference method (radiology for rectoceles, rectal intussusceptions, and abnormal perineal descent; manometry for anismus) was observed in 80 percent of cases. In rectoceles, anismus, and rectal intussusceptions especially, excellent negative predictive values were obtained (96, 96, and 80 percent, respectively). Clinical examination always diagnosed high-grade intussusceptions. Nevertheless, abnormal perineal descent was poorly evaluated in 20 patients. When compared with anal manometry, digital assessment was able to quantify resting and squeeze pressures and length of the anal canal with excellent correlation and good global agreement as well as predicting a short or hypotonic anal canal. Clinical assessment is usually sufficient and accurate in most pelvirectal disorders encountered in patients complaining of defecatory difficulties. Both anorectal manometry and evacuation proctography retain a definite but limited place in investigating pelvirectal disorders.

Defecatory disorders, anorectal and pelvic floor dysfunction: a polygamy? Radiologic and manometric studies in 41 patients

A consecutive series of 41 patients with defecatory disorders was prospectively studied by anal manometry and evacuation proctography to determine the relationship between abnormalities and symptoms. The patients (29 female, 12 male, aged 41 +/- 2.3 years) all complained of difficulty in evacuation. All had normal colonoscopy and biochemistry. There was no evidence of megacolon or megarectum, and no symptoms had been previously treated by pelvic floor surgery. All subjects completed detailed questionnaires related to gastrointestinal symptoms with special reference to excessive straining and discomfort, digital manipulations during defecation, a sense of pelvic heaviness and incomplete evacuation. Each patient underwent clinical examination, anal manometry and defecography during a single outpatient visit. Rectocele (16 patients) was significantly associated with vaginal digitation, lower stool frequency, delayed rectal emptying and decreased rectal sensation to distension. Increased anal pressure on straining (14 patients) was also related to a poor rectal emptying in 13 patients. Neither perineal descent (24 patients) nor external rectal prolapse (12 patients) was related to objective obstruction. Nevertheless there was an association with pelvic heaviness and lower anal manometric recordings. Five among 16 patients with rectocele had manometric anismus. Forty percent of patients with intussusception also had a paradoxical sphincter response during defaecation. Furthermore, associated abnormalities were extremely common (34 of 41 patients), accurate interpretation of which was necessary for planning effective therapy.

Role of body position, gender, and age on pelvic floor location and mobility

The location and mobility of pelvic floor in different body positions and their relation to age and gender was assessed in 117 patients (19 men, 98 women, age range 10-77 years) with chronic nonorganic constipation (defined as less than three bowel movements per week for at least three years) by means of defocography. Eleven females (age range 16-69 years), without gastrointestinal symptoms, affected by noninvasive carcinoma of the cervix represented a control group. Pelvic floor location was measured as the distance in centimeters of the anorectal junction from the pubococcygeal line; pelvic floor mobility was measured during squeezing, straining, and defecation assuming the pelvic location at rest as zero reference. Pelvic floor location and mobility did not differ between controls and constipated patients. In both groups pelvic floor location at rest was significantly higher (P = 0.001) with patients lying down than sitting up, whereas pelvic floor mobility during squeezing was greater with the patients sitting up than lying down (P = 0.003). In both positions, pelvic floor location at rest was significantly lower (P = 0.01) in females than in males. Pelvic floor mobility during squeezing was significantly different between gender. Parity and hysterectomy did not appear to affect pelvic floor location. Data emerging from this study indicate that body position is one of the major determinants of the pelvic floor location.

Defecography in patients with anorectal disorders. Which findings are clinically relevant?

To evaluate the results and clinical impact of defecography in patients with anorectal disorders, 100 results of defecographic examinations from 92 patients were reviewed. The defecographic results were screened for the anorectal angle, defined both at rest and during straining, perineal descent, and abnormalities of the rectal configuration during straining. Anal manometry, saline infusion test, rectal capacity measurement, and anal electromyography (EMG) were also performed. There was a significant difference (P less than 0.001) both at rest (22 degrees) and during straining (12 degrees) between the two anorectal angle measurements. Incontinent patients had a larger anorectal angle, both at rest and during straining, than continent patients (P less than 0.04), but with a large overlap. The anorectal angle was not influenced by gender or age. An abnormal rectal configuration was found in 62 defecographic examinations. From the 8 patients with rectopexy performed for a large rectocele or intussusception, incontinent patients with an intussusception had the best results. In four patients, anal EMG showed an increased activity of the external sphincter during straining. Two of these four patients had abnormal defecograhic results. No correlations were found between anorectal angle and the other function tests. In conclusion, the anorectal angle lacks clinical relevance. In patients with defecation problems, defecography may be indicated whenever other investigations (physical examination, anal manometry, anal EMG) have excluded local pathology or a spastic pelvic floor syndrome. In these situations, defecography could detect an intussusception, which could easily be treated with rectopexy.