1
|
Talebi A, Alimadadi E, Akbari A, Bahardoust M, Towliat M, Eslami M, Agah S, Kashani AF. Improvement of Patient Satisfaction and Anorectal Manometry Parameters After Biofeedback Therapy in Patients with Different Types of Dyssynergic Defecation. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback 2020; 45:267-274. [PMID: 32556708 DOI: 10.1007/s10484-020-09476-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Biofeedback is a well-known and effective treatment for patients with fecal evacuation disorder (FED). The main purpose of this study was to investigate the outcome and the effects of biofeedback therapy on physiological parameters as assessed by manometry in patients with FED. Data from 114 consecutive patients with FED who underwent biofeedback therapy in Sara Gastrointestinal clinic in Tehran, Iran during 2015-2018 were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. All participants underwent a comprehensive evaluation of anorectal function that included anorectal manometry and a balloon expulsion test at the baseline and after biofeedback therapy. Maximum anal squeeze pressure and sustained anal squeeze pressure were improved up to 100% and 94.7% of normal values in the patients after biofeedback, respectively (P < 0.001). First rectal sensation, was significantly decreased (25 ± 18.5 vs. 15.5 ± 5.2) while the maximum tolerable volume was significantly increased (233.6 ± 89.7 vs. 182.4 ± 23.1) after biofeedback therapy (P < 0.001). Type I dyssynergia was the most common type, effecting 82 cases (71.9%) of our patients. Dyssynergia parameters were improved 50-80% in 34 (41.5%) and 10 (31.3%) type I and non-type I patients, respectively. Over 80% improvement of dyssynergia parameters occurred in 48 (58.5%) and 22 (68.8%) type I and non-type I patients, respectively. These differences were not statistically significant between the two groups (P = 0.3). In addition, the ability to reject the balloon was significantly better in post intervention measurements (P < 0.001). Biofeedback not only improves the symptoms in patients of FED but also reverses more than 80% the dyssynergic parameters of defecation. However, due to the general effectiveness of biofeedback treatment in different types of DD, there were no significant differences between their improvement scores.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Atefeh Talebi
- Colorectal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Elaheh Alimadadi
- Colorectal and Ostomy Nurse, Special Education of OWI (Ostomy Wound Incontinence) from Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
| | - Abolfazl Akbari
- Colorectal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Mansour Bahardoust
- Colorectal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | | | | | - Shahram Agah
- Colorectal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Serra J, Pohl D, Azpiroz F, Chiarioni G, Ducrotté P, Gourcerol G, Hungin APS, Layer P, Mendive JM, Pfeifer J, Rogler G, Scott SM, Simrén M, Whorwell P. European society of neurogastroenterology and motility guidelines on functional constipation in adults. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2020; 32:e13762. [PMID: 31756783 DOI: 10.1111/nmo.13762] [Citation(s) in RCA: 120] [Impact Index Per Article: 24.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2019] [Revised: 10/14/2019] [Accepted: 10/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Chronic constipation is a common disorder with a reported prevalence ranging from 3% to 27% in the general population. Several management strategies, including diagnostic tests, empiric treatments, and specific treatments, have been developed. Our aim was to develop European guidelines for the clinical management of constipation. DESIGN After a thorough review of the literature by experts in relevant fields, including gastroenterologists, surgeons, general practitioners, radiologists, and experts in gastrointestinal motility testing from various European countries, a Delphi consensus process was used to produce statements and practical algorithms for the management of chronic constipation. KEY RESULTS Seventy-three final statements were agreed upon after the Delphi process. The level of evidence for most statements was low or very low. A high level of evidence was agreed only for anorectal manometry as a comprehensive evaluation of anorectal function and for treatment with osmotic laxatives, especially polyethylene glycol, the prokinetic drug prucalopride, secretagogues, such as linaclotide and lubiprostone and PAMORAs for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation. However, the level of agreement between the authors was good for most statements (80% or more of the authors). The greatest disagreement was related to the surgical management of constipation. CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES European guidelines on chronic constipation, with recommendations and algorithms, were developed by experts. Despite the high level of agreement between the different experts, the level of scientific evidence for most recommendations was low, highlighting the need for future research to increase the evidence and improve treatment outcomes in these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jordi Serra
- Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Badalona, Spain
- Motility and Functional Gut Disorders Unit, University Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain
- Department of Medicine, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Badalona, Spain
| | - Daniel Pohl
- Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Fernando Azpiroz
- Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), Badalona, Spain
- Digestive System Research Unit, University Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Giuseppe Chiarioni
- Division of Gastroenterology B, AOUI Verona, Verona, Italy
- UNC Center for Functional GI and Motility Disorders, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Philippe Ducrotté
- Department of Gastroenterology, UMR INSERM 1073, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France
| | - Guillaume Gourcerol
- Department of Physiology, UMR INSERM 1073 & CIC INSERM 1404, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France
| | - A Pali S Hungin
- General Practice, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK
| | - Peter Layer
- Department of Medicine, Israelitic Hospital, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Juan-Manuel Mendive
- Sant Adrià de Besòs (Barcelona) Catalan Institut of Health (ICS), La Mina Primary Health Care Centre, Badalona, Spain
| | - Johann Pfeifer
- Department of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Gerhard Rogler
- Division of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - S Mark Scott
- Neurogastroenterology Group, Centre for Neuroscience, Surgery and Trauma, Blizard Institute, Barts, UK
- The London School of Medicine & Dentistry, Queen Mary University London, London, UK
| | - Magnus Simrén
- Department of Internal Medicine & Clinical Nutrition, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Peter Whorwell
- Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology & Gastroenterology, Neurogastroenterology Unit, Wythenshawe Hospital, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|