Relationships between the results of anorectal investigations and symptom severity in patients with faecal incontinence

Post-Operative Anorectal Manometry in Children following Anorectal Malformation Repair: A Systematic Review

Despite surgical correction, children with anorectal malformations may experience long-term bowel dysfunction, including fecal incontinence and/or disorders of evacuation. Anorectal manometry is the most widely used test of anorectal function. Although considerable attention has been devoted to its application in the anorectal malformation cohort, there have been few attempts to consolidate the findings obtained. This systematic review aimed to (1) synthesize and evaluate the existing data regarding anorectal manometry results in children following anorectal malformation repair, and (2) evaluate the manometry protocols utilized, including equipment, assessment approach, and interpretation. We reviewed four databases (Embase, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and PubMed) for relevant articles published between 1 January 1985 and 10 March 2022. Studies reporting post-operative anorectal manometry in children (<18 years) following anorectal malformation repair were evaluated for eligibility. Sixty-three studies were eligible for inclusion. Of the combined total cohort of 2155 patients, anorectal manometry results were reported for 1755 children following repair of anorectal malformations. Reduced resting pressure was consistently identified in children with anorectal malformations, particularly in those with more complex malformation types and/or fecal incontinence. Significant variability was identified in relation to manometry equipment, protocols, and interpretation. Few studies provided adequate cohort medical characteristics to facilitate interpretation of anorectal manometry findings within the context of the broader continence mechanism. This review highlights a widespread lack of standardization in the anorectal manometry procedure used to assess anorectal function in children following anorectal malformation repair. Consequently, interpretation and comparison of findings, both within and between institutions, is exceedingly challenging, if not impossible. Standardized manometry protocols, accompanied by a consistent approach to analysis, including definitions of normality and abnormality, are essential to enhance the comparability and clinical relevance of results.

Fecobionics characterization of female patients with fecal incontinence

Defecatory disorders including fecal incontinence (FI) are diagnosed on the symptom pattern supplemented by anorectal manometry (ARM), the balloon expulsion test (BET), and endo-anal ultrasonography. In this study, we used a simulated stool named Fecobionics to study distinct defecation patterns in FI patients using preload-afterload diagrams and to provide comparative data on defecation indices (DIs) between passive and urge incontinent patients. All subjects had Fecobionics, endo-anal ultrasonography and ARM-BET done. The Fecobionics bag was distended in rectum until urge in 37 female patients (64.1 ± 1.5 yrs) and a group of normal subjects (NS, 12F, age 64.8 ± 2.8 yrs). Rear-front pressure (preload-afterload) diagrams and DIs were compared between groups. The FISI score in the patients was 8.6 ± 0.6. The NS did not report FI-related symptoms. All patients and NS defecated Fecobionics and ARM-BET within 2 min. The urge volume was 46.1 ± 3.6 and 35.3 ± 5.9 mL in the FI and normal groups (P > 0.1). The expulsion duration was 14.8 ± 2.4 and 19.8 ± 5.1 s for the two groups (P > 0.1). The preload-afterload diagrams demonstrated clockwise loops that clearly differed between the FI subtypes and NS. The DIs showed profound difference between patients and NS. Fecobionics data showed higher correlation with symptoms in FI patients than ARM-BET. Fecobionics obtained novel pressure signatures in subtypes of FI patients and NS. Fecobionics provides DI data that cannot be obtained with ARM-BET.

Prevalence of double incontinence in patients with fecal incontinence undergoing anorectal manometry and discriminating factors

Background: Double incontinence (DI) is the concomitant presence of incontinence for urine and stool. Aim of this study is to assess prevalence of DI in patients with fecal incontinence (FI) undergoing Ano-Rectal Manometry (ARM) in a tertiary care center and to identify factors discriminating between both. Methods: Medical records of consecutive patients referred for ARM for FI during 2 years at University Hospital Brussels were retrospectively reviewed. Results from ARM, presence of diarrhea, diseases from recto-anal or peri-anal region, prior abdominal, proctological or urological surgery and neurological comorbidities were recorded. Results: Of 101 enrolled patients, 77% suffered from solitary FI and 23% from DI. Diarrhea was more common in DI vs. FI (43,5% vs. 15,4%, P=.008), as was the presence of neurological comorbidities (34.8% vs. 10.3%, P=.009) and urological interventions (21.7% vs. 1.3%, P=.002). In respect to women only, more urological interventions were performed (20% vs. 0%, P=.006) and more diseases from recto-anal or peri-anal region were encountered in DI vs. FI (35.0 % vs. 12.5 %, P= .045). In men, neurological disorders were significantly more common in DI (100.0% vs. 3.3%, P=.002). Conclusions: This study identified gender-specific patterns of comorbidities in FI and DI. ARM had no distinctive value between FI and DI in men and women. A prospective study should provide more information on patients at risk for incontinence and help to identify distinct features between FI and DI in men and women.

Fecal incontinence subtype assessment (FI-SA): A new tool to distinguish among subtypes of fecal incontinence in a neurogenic population

INTRODUCTION

Two subtypes of fecal incontinence (FI) are defined in the literature (urge and passive FI). The pertinence of this classification is unknown due to conflicting findings and heterogeneity of definitions. However, no questionnaire is available to clearly classify patients among subtypes. The objective of the present study was to develop and validate a new tool (Fecal incontinence subtype assessment, FI-SA) in order to better classify patients among the different subtypes of FI.

METHODS

A prospective monocentric study was conducted in consecutive patients with FI according to Rome IV criteria. To validate psychometric properties of the FI-SA questionnaire, a literature review and qualitative interviews were performed and discussed with an expert panel. A feasibility study was realized to assess acceptability and comprehension of items. The reproducibility was investigated in a validation study.

RESULTS

Comprehension and acceptability were excellent in 90% of patients in the feasibility study (n = 30). Validation study (n = 100) showed a good reproducibility with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.91 and 0.89 for questions 1 and 2. Time to fill the questionnaire was 40.0 s. 98.0% patients were classified among subtypes of FI: 34.0% passive FI, 32.0% urge FI and 32.0% mixed FI.

CONCLUSION

FI-SA is the first questionnaire to classify patients among subtypes of FI with good psychometric characteristics and the first questionnaire introducing the concept of mixed FI. FI-SA could help to determine the pertinence of this classification of FI in the management of these patients.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of anal motor and rectal sensory dysfunction in male and female patients undergoing anorectal manometry for symptoms of faecal incontinence

AIM

Manometry is the best established technique to assess anorectal function in faecal incontinence. By systematic review, pooled prevalences of anal hypotonia/hypocontractility and rectal hypersensitivity/hyposensitivity in male and female patients were determined in controlled studies using anorectal manometry.

METHODS

Searches of MEDLINE and Embase were completed. Screening, data extraction and bias assessment were performed by two reviewers. Meta-analysis was performed based on a random effects model with heterogeneity evaluated by I² .

RESULTS

Of 2116 identified records, only 13 studies (2981 faecal incontinence patients; 1028 controls) met the inclusion criteria. Anal tone was evaluated in 10 studies and contractility in 11; rectal sensitivity in five. Only three studies had low risk of bias. Pooled prevalence of anal hypotonia was 44% (95% CI 32-56, I² = 96.35%) in women and 27% (95% CI 14-40, I² = 94.12%) in men. The pooled prevalence of anal hypocontractility was 69% (95% CI 57-81; I² = 98.17%) in women and 36% (95% CI 18-53; I² = 96.77%) in men. Pooled prevalence of rectal hypersensitivity was 10% (95% CI 4-15; I² = 80.09%) in women and 4% (95% CI 1-7; I² = 51.25%) in men, whereas hyposensitivity had a pooled prevalence of 7% (95% CI 5-9; I² = 0.00%) in women compared to 19% (95% CI 15-23; I² = 0.00%) in men.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of appropriately controlled studies of anorectal manometry is small with fewer still at low risk of bias. Results were subject to gender differences, wide confidence intervals and high heterogeneity indicating the need for international collective effort to harmonize practice and reporting to improve certainty of diagnosis.

Understanding the physiology of human defaecation and disorders of continence and evacuation

The act of defaecation, although a ubiquitous human experience, requires the coordinated actions of the anorectum and colon, pelvic floor musculature, and the enteric, peripheral and central nervous systems. Defaecation is best appreciated through the description of four phases, which are, temporally and physiologically, reasonably discrete. However, given the complexity of this process, it is unsurprising that disorders of defaecation are both common and problematic; almost everyone will experience constipation at some time in their life and many will develop faecal incontinence. A detailed understanding of the normal physiology of defaecation and continence is critical to inform management of disorders of defaecation. During the past decade, there have been major advances in the investigative tools used to assess colonic and anorectal function. This Review details the current understanding of defaecation and continence. This includes an overview of the relevant anatomy and physiology, a description of the four phases of defaecation, and factors influencing defaecation (demographics, stool frequency/consistency, psychobehavioural factors, posture, circadian rhythm, dietary intake and medications). A summary of the known pathophysiology of defaecation disorders including constipation, faecal incontinence and irritable bowel syndrome is also included, as well as considerations for further research in this field.

Comparison of clinical and paraclinical characteristics of patients with urge, mixed, and passive fecal incontinence: a systematic literature review

PURPOSE

Two subgroups of fecal incontinence (FI) are described in literature and used in clinical practice. However, the pertinence of this classification of FI is still unknown as there are no clear established guidelines. To a better understanding, we performed a systematic review to characterize the different types of FI (active, passive, or mixed) on the basis of clinical presentation and complementary explorations.

METHODS

This systematic literature review was performed in reference to recommendations for systematic review using PRISMA guidelines without date restriction, until May 2020. This systematic review was performed without temporal limitation using MEDLINE-PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases.

RESULTS

Six hundred nine unique citations were identified from all the databases combined. Of those, 21 studies met the inclusion criteria, with 8 retrospective observational studies and 13 prospective observational studies. There was a lack of homogeneity in definitions of passive and urge (active) FI among studies. Prevalence of passive and urge FI was respectively of 4.0-5.0 and 15.0-35.0%. Clinical characteristics, physical examination, and endoanal imaging were not evaluated in most studies. In anorectal manometry, maximal squeeze pressure was higher in passive FI subgroup in most studies and results regarding maximal resting pressure remain discordant. There seemed to be no difference regarding first sensation volume and maximal tolerable volume among subgroups. A few studies evaluated pudendal terminal nerve motor latency with no difference among subgroups.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of well-conducted prospective studies comparing the different subtypes of FI with validated definitions in both clinical and paraclinical examinations.

The relationships between the results of contemporary tests of anorectal structure and sensorimotor function and the severity of fecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic investigations for fecal incontinence (FI) assess the structure and sensorimotor function of the anorectum. Investigations include anorectal manometry, anorectal sensory testing, pudendal nerve terminal motor latencies (PNTML), and endoanal sonography. The severity of FI and results of investigations are often discordant and the rate of symptom resolution following treatment remains <40%. High-resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM) and three-dimensional endoanal ultrasound (3D-US) have been introduced during the last decade. This study aims to assess the strength of relationships between contemporary investigation results and FI severity.

METHODS

Adults presenting for investigation of FI were assessed using the St Mark's FI severity score (SMIS), HRAM, anorectal sensory testing, PNTML, and 3D-US.

KEY RESULTS

246 patients were included. There were significant relationships between the SMIS and HRAM (resting pressure r_s = -0.23, 95% CI = (-0.34, -0.11), P < .001; squeeze pressure (r_s  = -0.26, 95% CI = (-0.37, -0.14), P < .001) and 3D-US (anterior EAS length r_s = -0.22, 95% CI = (-0.34, -0.09), P = .001). The relationships between SMIS and HRAM had a greater effect size in those with urge-predominant symptoms (resting pressure: r_s = -0.40, 95% CI = (-0.57, -0.20), P < .001, squeeze pressure: r_s = -0.34, 95% CI = (-0.52, -0.12), P = .003). Overall, the variance in SMIS accounted for by anorectal investigations was 8.6% (R² = 0.098, adjusted R² = 0.086, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Anorectal investigations are not strong predictors of FI severity. These findings may reflect the multifactorial, heterogeneous pathophysiology of FI, the limitations of the SMIS and anorectal investigations, and contributing factors extrinsic to the anorectum.

MAIN MANOMETRIC FINDINGS AND POTENTIAL FOR ANORECTAL PHYSICAL THERAPY IN THE TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH EVACUATION DISORDERS

BACKGROUND

Evacuation disorders are prevalent in the adult population, and a significant portion of cases may originate from pelvic floor muscle dysfunctions. Anorectal manometry (ARM) is an important diagnostic tool and can guide conservative treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prevalence of pelvic dysfunction in patients with evacuation disorders through clinical and manometric findings and to evaluate, using the same findings, whether there are published protocols that could be guided by anorectal manometry.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective database of 278 anorectal manometries performed for the investigation of evacuation disorders in patients seen at the anorectal physiology outpatient clinic of Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto between January 2015 to June 2019 was conducted. The following parameters were calculated: resting pressure (RP), squeeze pressure (SP), high-pressure zone (HPZ), rectal sensitivity (RS) and rectal capacity (RC). The pressure measurements and manometric plots were reviewed to determine the diagnosis and to propose potential pelvic physical therapy procedures. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Fisher's exact test were used to compare the continuous variables and to evaluate the equality of variances between groups of patients with fecal incontinence (FI) and chronic constipation (CC). Results with a significance level lower than 0.05 (P-value <0.05) were considered statistically significant. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM® SPSS® Statistics version 20.

RESULTS

The mean age of the sample was 45±22 years, with a predominance of females (64.4%) and economically inactive (72.7%) patients. The indications for exam performance were FI (65.8%) and CC (34.2%). Patients with FI had lower RP (41.9 mmHg x 67.6 mmHg; P<0.001), SP (85.4 mmHg x 116.0 mmHg; P<0.001), HPZ (1.49 cm x 2.42 cm; P<0.001), RS (57.9 mL x 71.5 mL; P=0.044) and RC (146.2 mL x 195.5 mL; P<0.001) compared to those of patients with CC. For patients with FI, the main diagnosis was the absence of a functional anal canal (49.7%). For patients with CC, the main diagnosis was outflow tract obstruction (54.7%). For patients with FI, the main protocol involved a combination of anorectal biofeedback (aBF) with tibial nerve stimulation (TNS) (57.9%). For patients with CC, the most indicated protocol was aBF combined with TNS and rectal balloon training (RBT) (54.7%).

CONCLUSION

There was a high prevalence of pelvic floor changes in patients with evacuation disorders. There was a high potential for performing pelvic floor physical therapy based on the clinical and manometric findings.