The clinical value of magnetic resonance defecography in males with obstructed defecation syndrome

Comparative study of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy versus perineal stapler resection for external full-thickness rectal prolapse in elderly patients: enhanced outcomes and reduced recurrence rates-a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In elderly patients with external full-thickness rectal prolapse (EFTRP), the exact differences in postoperative recurrence and functional outcomes between laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy (LVMR) and perineal stapler resection (PSR) have not yet been investigated.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicenter study on 330 elderly patients divided into LVMR group (n = 250) and PSR (n = 80) from April 2012 to April 2019. Patients were evaluated before and after surgery by Wexner incontinence scale, Altomare constipation scale, and patient satisfaction questionnaire. The primary outcomes were incidence and risk factors for EFTRP recurrence. Secondary outcomes were postoperative incontinence, constipation, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

LVMR was associated with fewer postoperative complications (p < 0.001), lower prolapse recurrence (p < 0.001), lower Wexner incontinence score (p = 0.03), and lower Altomare's score (p = 0.047). Furthermore, LVMR demonstrated a significantly higher surgery-recurrence interval (p < 0.001), incontinence improvement (p = 0.019), and patient satisfaction (p < 0.001) than PSR. Three and 13 patients developed new symptoms in LVMR and PSR, respectively. The predictors for prolapse recurrence were LVMR (associated with 93% risk reduction of recurrence, OR 0.067, 95% CI 0.03-0.347, p = 0.001), symptom duration (prolonged duration was associated with an increased risk of recurrence, OR 1.131, 95% CI 1.036-1.236, p = 0.006), and length of prolapse (increased length was associated with a high recurrence risk (OR = 1.407, 95% CI = 1.197-1.655, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LVMR is safe for EFTRP treatment in elderly patients with low recurrence, and improved postoperative functional outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial.gov (NCT05915936), retrospectively registered on June 14, 2023.

Assessment of defecation disorders using high-resolution MRI-defecography

AIMS

The aim of this retrospective study was to try to find correlations between different diagnoses established by clinical examination, anorectal manometry and MRI-defecography and, the association with psychiatric disorders.

METHODS

44 patients (median age 53.81 years) presenting with intestinal motility disorders and who underwent clinical, biological and psychiatric examination, dynamic defecographic-MRI (resting, squeezing, straining, defecation and evacuation phases), anorectal manometry, colonoscopy. MRI was performed using the 1,5 T.

RESULTS

MRI-defecography revealed the following changes: anismus (16), rectocele (12), pelvic floor dysfunction (6), peritoneocele (2), cervical-cystic-ptosis (1), rectal prolapse (6), and in 1 case the examination was normal. Hypertonic anal sphincter (16) and lack of defecation reflex (12) at anorectal manometry correlated with anismus in all patients at MRI-defecography. Lack of inhibitor anal reflex (6) was associated with rectocele (4), cervix-cysto-ptosis (1) and peritoneocele (2). Anxiety (11), depression (6) and anxiety-depressive disorders (10) were found in 27/44, somatization disorders in 9/44 and no psychiatric changes in 8/44 cases.

CONCLUSION

As multiparous women are at risk for outlet obstruction constipation, MRI-defecography is suggested in this category. There is good correlation between diagnosis using anorectal manometry and MRI-defecography in patients with terminal constipation and anismus. Lower defecation dysfunction is often associated with psychiatric disorders.

Diagnostic approach to faecal incontinence: What test and when to perform?

Faecal incontinence (FI) is a debilitating common end result of several diseases affecting the quality of life and leading to patient disability, morbidity, and increased societal burden. Given the various causes of FI, it is important to assess and identify the underlying pathomechanisms. Several investigatory tools are available including high-resolution anorectal manometry, transrectal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and electromyography. This review article provides an overview on the causes and pathophysiology of FI and the author’s perspective of the stepwise investigation of patients with FI based on the available literature. Overall, high-resolution anorectal manometry should be the first investigatory tool for FI, followed by either transrectal ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging for anal internal sphincter and external anal sphincter injury, respectively.

MRI of the Male Pelvic Floor

The pelvic floor is a complex structure that supports the pelvic organs and provides resting tone and voluntary control of the urethral and anal sphincters. Dysfunction of or injury to the pelvic floor can lead to gastrointestinal, urinary, and sexual dysfunction. The prevalence of pelvic floor disorders is much lower in men than in women, and because of this, the majority of the published literature pertaining to MRI of the pelvic floor is oriented toward evaluation of the female pelvic floor. The male pelvic floor has sex-specific differences in anatomy and pathophysiologic disorders. Despite these differences, static and dynamic MRI features of these disorders, specifically gastrointestinal disorders, are similar in both sexes. MRI and MR defecography can be used to evaluate anorectal disorders related to the pelvic floor. MRI can also be used after prostatectomy to help predict the risk of postsurgical incontinence, to evaluate postsurgical function by using dynamic voiding MR cystourethrography, and subsequently, to assess causes of incontinence treatment failure. Increased tone of the pelvic musculature in men secondary to chronic pain can lead to sexual dysfunction. This article reviews normal male pelvic floor anatomy and how it differs from the female pelvis; MRI techniques for imaging the male pelvis; and urinary, gastrointestinal, and sexual conditions related to abnormalities of pelvic floor structures in men.Online supplemental material is available for this article.^©RSNA, 2019.

Laparoscopic Ventral Rectopexy Versus Stapled Transanal Rectal Resection for Treatment of Obstructed Defecation in the Elderly: Long-term Results of a Prospective Randomized Study

BACKGROUND

Obstructed defecation is a common complaint in coloproctology. Many anal, abdominal, and laparoscopic procedures are adopted to correct the underlying condition.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare long-term functional outcome, recurrence rate, and quality of life between laparoscopic ventral rectopexy and stapled transanal rectal resection in the treatment of obstructed defecation.

DESIGN

This was a prospective randomized study.

SETTING

This study was performed at academic medical centers.

PATIENTS

Patients were included if they had obstructed defecation attributed to pelvic structural abnormalities that did not to respond to conservative measures. Exclusion criteria included nonrelaxing puborectalis, previous abdominal surgery, other anal pathology, and pudendal neuropathy.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly allocated to either laparoscopic ventral rectopexy (group 1) or stapled transanal rectal resection (group 2).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measures were improvement of modified obstructed defecation score and recurrences after ≥3 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, continence status using Wexner incontinence score, and quality of life using Patient Assessment of Constipation-Quality of Life Questionnaire.

RESULTS

The study included 112 patients (56 in each arm). ASA score II was reported in 32 patients (18 in group 1 and 14 in group 2; p = 0.12), whereas 3 patients in each group had ASA score III. Minor postoperative complications were seen in 11 patients (20%) of group 1 and 14 patients of group 2 (25%; p = 0.65). During follow-up, 3 patients had fecal urgency after stapled transanal rectal resection but no sexual dysfunction in either procedure. After 6 months, modified obstructed defecation score improvement >50% was reported in 73% versus 82% in groups 1 and 2 (p = 0.36). After a mean follow-up of 41 months, recurrences of symptoms were reported in 7% in group 1 versus 24% in group 2 (p = 0.04). Six months postoperation, perineal descent improved >50% in defecogram in 80% of group 1 versus no improvement in group 2. Quality of life significantly improved in both groups after 6 months; however a significant long-term drop (>36 months) was seen only in group 2.

LIMITATIONS

Possible limitations of this study are the presence of a single operator and the absence of blindness of the technique for both patient and assessor.

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly patients even with comorbidities, both laparoscopic ventral rectopexy and stapled transanal rectal resection are safe and can improve function of the anorectum in patients with obstructed defecation attributed to structural abnormalities. Laparoscopic ventral rectopexy has better long-term functional outcome, less complications, and less recurrences compared with stapled transanal rectal resection. Perineal descent only improves after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. Stapled transanal rectal resection was shown not to be the first choice in elderly patients with obstructed defecation unless they had a medical contraindication to laparoscopic procedures. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A788.

Dynamic MRI of the pelvic floor: comparison of performance in supine vs left lateral body position

OBJECTIVE:

To investigate the performance of MR-defecography (MRD) in lateral body position as an alternative to supine position.

METHODS:

22 consecutive patients (16 females; mean age 51 ± 19.4) with obstructed defecation and 20 healthy volunteers (11 females; mean age 33.4 ± 11.5) underwent MRD in a closed-configuration 3T-MRI in supine and lateral position. MRD included T₂ weighted images at rest and during defecation after filling the rectum with 250 ml water-based gel. Measurements were performed in reference to the pubococcygeal line and grade of evacuation was assessed. Image quality (IQ) was rated on a 5-point-scale (5 = excellent).

RESULTS:

In patients grades of middle and posterior compartment descent were similar in both body positions (p > 0.05). Grades of anterior compartment descent were significantly higher in lateral position (21/22 vs 17/22 patients with normal or small descent, p < 0.034). In volunteers grades of descent were similar for all compartments in supine and lateral position (p > 0.05). When attempting to defecate in supine position 6/22 (27%) patients showed no evacuation, while in lateral position only 3/22 (14%) were not able to evacuate. IQ in patients was equal at rest (4.4 ± 0.5 and 4.7 ± 0.6, p > 0.05) and slightly better in supine compared to the lateral position during defecation (4.5 ± 0.4 vs 3.9 ± 0.9, p < 0.017). IQ in volunteers was equal in supine and lateral position (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION:

In lateral position, more patients were able to evacuate with similar grades of pelvic floor descent compared to supine position. MRD in lateral position may be a valuable alternative for patients unable to defecate in supine position.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:

In lateral position, more patients were able to evacuate during MRD. MRD in lateral position may be an alternative for patients unable to defecate in supine position.