1
|
Shahsavari D, Rao SSC. Review article: advances in the diagnosis and management of anorectal motility disorders. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2024; 60:701-714. [PMID: 39051556 DOI: 10.1111/apt.18170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2024] [Revised: 05/27/2024] [Accepted: 07/08/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Anorectal motility disorders such as dyssynergic defecation (DD), faecal incontinence (FI) and anorectal pain affect 40% of the population and are a frequent reason for gastroenterology consultation. They significantly affect the quality of life and lead to psychological distress. Lack of understanding of these problems compounded by a lack of availability and knowledge of diagnostic tools in most medical centres and/or trained physicians has significantly hampered this field. AIMS To discuss the latest advances in pathophysiology, diagnostic tests and therapeutic options for these disorders using an evidence-based approach. METHODS We reviewed the published literature over the past 20 years on DD, FI and anorectal pain and distilled these into a narrative review. RESULTS A detailed history, prospective stool diary and digital rectal exam, together with diagnostic tests such as anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion test, translumbosacral anorectal magnetic stimulation test for assessing neuropathy, defecography and anal ultrasound, can provide detailed mechanistic and structural information. Such knowledge can pave the way for a meaningful and pathophysiologic-based management approach. This could include biofeedback therapy for DD or FI, sensory training for rectal hyposensitivity or sensory adaptation training for rectal hypersensitivity or sphincter bulking agents or neuromodulation therapies. These treatments are effective and safe. CONCLUSIONS Anorectal motility disorders are common, but either less well recognized or poorly managed by most gastroenterologists. Equipped with the practical and up-to-date knowledge provided in this review, physicians could provide improved health care for these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dariush Shahsavari
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, USA
| | - Satish S C Rao
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sharma A, Herekar A, Yan Y, Karunaratne T, Rao SSC. Dyssynergic Defecation and Other Evacuation Disorders. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2022; 51:55-69. [PMID: 35135665 DOI: 10.1016/j.gtc.2021.10.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/21/2023]
Abstract
Constipated patients are frequently referred to gastroenterologists for symptoms refractory to lifestyle modifications and laxatives. Dyssynergic defecation, the dyscoordination of rectoanal, abdominal, and pelvic floor muscles to facilitate defecation, is a major cause of refractory primary constipation. Understanding of the diagnosis, evaluation, and management of dyssynergic defecation and other evacuation disorders will allow providers to effectively manage these patients. This review focuses on the definition, pathophysiology, evaluation, and treatment of dyssynergic defecation and other evacuation disorders. Emerging treatments for these disorders include home biofeedback therapy for dyssynergic defecation and translumbosacral neuromodulation therapy for levator ani syndrome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amol Sharma
- Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
| | - Anam Herekar
- Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA
| | - Yun Yan
- Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA
| | - Tennekoon Karunaratne
- Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA
| | - Satish S C Rao
- Division of Gastroenterology/Hepatology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van Gruting IM, Stankiewicz A, Thakar R, Santoro GA, IntHout J, Sultan AH. Imaging modalities for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with obstructed defaecation syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 9:CD011482. [PMID: 34553773 PMCID: PMC8459393 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011482.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Obstructed defaecation syndrome (ODS) is difficulty in evacuating stools, requiring straining efforts at defaecation, having the sensation of incomplete evacuation, or the need to manually assist defaecation. This is due to a physical blockage of the faecal stream during defaecation attempts, caused by rectocele, enterocele, intussusception, anismus or pelvic floor descent. Evacuation proctography (EP) is the most common imaging technique for diagnosis of posterior pelvic floor disorders. It has been regarded as the reference standard because of extensive experience, although it has been proven not to have perfect accuracy. Moreover, EP is invasive, embarrassing and uses ionising radiation. Alternative imaging techniques addressing these issues have been developed and assessed for their accuracy. Because of varying results, leading to a lack of consensus, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature are required. OBJECTIVES To determine the diagnostic test accuracy of EP, dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and pelvic floor ultrasound for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with ODS, using latent class analysis in the absence of a reference standard, and to assess whether MRI or ultrasound could replace EP. The secondary objective was to investigate differences in diagnostic test accuracy in relation to the use of rectal contrast, evacuation phase, patient position and cut-off values, which could influence test outcome. SEARCH METHODS We ran an electronic search on 18 December 2019 in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, SCI, CINAHL and CPCI. Reference list, Google scholar. We also searched WHO ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible articles. Two review authors conducted title and abstract screening and full-text assessment, resolving disagreements with a third review author. SELECTION CRITERIA Diagnostic test accuracy and cohort studies were eligible for inclusion if they evaluated the test accuracy of EP, and MRI or pelvic floor ultrasound, or both, for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with ODS. We excluded case-control studies. If studies partially met the inclusion criteria, we contacted the authors for additional information. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors performed data extraction, including study characteristics, 'Risk-of-bias' assessment, sources of heterogeneity and test accuracy results. We excluded studies if test accuracy data could not be retrieved despite all efforts. We performed meta-analysis using Bayesian hierarchical latent class analysis. For the index test to qualify as a replacement test for EP, both sensitivity and specificity should be similar or higher than the historic reference standard (EP), and for a triage test either specificity or sensitivity should be similar or higher. We conducted heterogeneity analysis assessing the effect of different test conditions on test accuracy. We ran sensitivity analyses by excluding studies with high risk of bias, with concerns about applicability, or those published before 2010. We assessed the overall quality of evidence (QoE) according to GRADE. MAIN RESULTS Thirty-nine studies covering 2483 participants were included into the meta-analyses. We produced pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for all index tests for each target condition. Findings of the sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main analysis. Sensitivity of EP for diagnosis of rectocele was 98% (credible interval (CrI)94%-99%), enterocele 91%(CrI 83%-97%), intussusception 89%(CrI 79%-96%) and pelvic floor descent 98%(CrI 93%-100%); specificity for enterocele was 96%(CrI 93%-99%), intussusception 92%(CrI 86%-97%) and anismus 97%(CrI 94%-99%), all with high QoE. Moderate to low QoE showed a sensitivity for anismus of 80%(CrI 63%-94%), and specificity for rectocele of 78%(CrI 63%-90%) and pelvic floor descent 83%(CrI 59%-96%). Specificity of MRI for diagnosis of rectocele was 90% (CrI 79%-97%), enterocele 99% (CrI 96%-100%) and intussusception 97% (CrI 88%-100%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with high QoE. MRI did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Heterogeneity analysis showed that sensitivity of MRI performed with evacuation phase was higher than without for rectocele (94%, CrI 87%-98%) versus 65%, CrI 52% to 89%, and enterocele (87%, CrI 74%-95% versus 62%, CrI 51%-88%), and sensitivity of MRI without evacuation phase was significantly lower than EP. Specificity of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) for diagnosis of rectocele was 89% (CrI 81%-96%), enterocele 98% (CrI 95%-100%) and intussusception 96% (CrI 91%-99%); sensitivity for anismus was 92% (CrI 72%-98%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with high QoE. TPUS did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Heterogeneity analysis showed that sensitivity of TPUS performed with rectal contrast was not significantly higher than without for rectocele(92%, CrI 69%-99% versus 81%, CrI 58%-95%), enterocele (90%, CrI 71%-99% versus 67%, CrI 51%-90%) and intussusception (90%, CrI 69%-98% versus 61%, CrI 51%-86%), and was lower than EP. Specificity of endovaginal ultrasound (EVUS) for diagnosis of rectocele was 76% (CrI 54%-93%), enterocele 97% (CrI 80%-99%) and intussusception 93% (CrI 72%-99%); sensitivity for anismus was 84% (CrI 59%-96%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with very low to moderate QoE. EVUS did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Specificity of dynamic anal endosonography (DAE) for diagnosis of rectocele was 88% (CrI 62%-99%), enterocele 97% (CrI 75%-100%) and intussusception 93% (CrI 65%-99%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with very low to moderate QoE. DAE did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Echodefaecography (EDF) had a sensitivity of 89% (CrI 65%-98%) and specificity of 92% (CrI 72%-99%) for intussusception, meeting the criteria to replace EP but with very low QoE. Specificity of EDF for diagnosis of rectocele was 89% (CrI 60%-99%) and for enterocele 97% (CrI 87%-100%); sensitivity for anismus was 87% (CrI 72%-96%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with low to very low QoE. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS In a population of women with symptoms of ODS, none of the imaging techniques met the criteria to replace EP. MRI and TPUS met the criteria of a triage test, as a positive test confirms diagnosis of rectocele, enterocele and intussusception, and a negative test rules out diagnosis of anismus. An evacuation phase increased sensitivity of MRI. Rectal contrast did not increase sensitivity of TPUS. QoE of EVUS, DAE and EDF was too low to draw conclusions. More well-designed studies are required to define their role in the diagnostic pathway of ODS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Isabelle Ma van Gruting
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Croydon University Hospital NHS Trust, Croydon, Netherlands
| | | | - Ranee Thakar
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Croydon University Hospital NHS Trust, Croydon, UK
| | - Giulio A Santoro
- Section of Anal Physiology and Ultrasound, Department of Surgery, Regional Hospital, Treviso, Italy
| | - Joanna IntHout
- Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Abdul H Sultan
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Croydon University Hospital NHS Trust, Croydon, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Kwakye G, Maguire LH. Anorectal Physiology Testing for Prolapse-What Tests are Necessary? Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2021; 34:15-21. [PMID: 33536845 PMCID: PMC7843946 DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1714246] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
Rectal prolapse frequently occurs in conjunction with functional and anatomic abnormalities of the bowel and pelvic floor. Prolapse surgery should have as its goal not only to correct the prolapse, but also to improve function to the greatest extent possible. Careful history-taking and physical exam continue to be the surgeon's best tools to put rectal prolapse in its functional context. Physiologic testing augments this and informs surgical decision-making. Defecography can identify concomitant middle compartment prolapse and pelvic floor hernias, potentially targeting patients for urogynecologic consultation or combined repair. Other tests, including manometry, ultrasound, and electrophysiologic testing, may be of utility in select cases. Here, we provide an overview of available testing options and their individual utility in rectal prolapse.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gifty Kwakye
- Division of Colorectal Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jiang AC, Panara A, Yan Y, Rao SSC. Assessing Anorectal Function in Constipation and Fecal Incontinence. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2020; 49:589-606. [PMID: 32718572 DOI: 10.1016/j.gtc.2020.04.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Constipation and fecal incontinence are commonly encountered complaints in the gastrointestinal clinic. Assessment of anorectal function includes comprehensive history, rectal examination, and prospective stool diary or electronic App diary that accurately captures bowel symptoms, evaluation of severity, and quality of life of measure. Evaluation of a suspected patient with dyssynergic constipation includes anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion test, and defecography. Investigation of a suspected patient with fecal incontinence includes high-resolution anorectal manometry; anal ultrasound or MRI; and neurophysiology tests, such as translumbosacral anorectal magnetic stimulation or pudendal nerve latency. This article provides an approach to the assessment of anorectal function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alice C Jiang
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, 600 S Paulina St, Chicago, IL 60612, USA
| | - Ami Panara
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Miami Leonard M. Miller School of Medicine, 1601 NW 12th Ave, Miami, FL, USA
| | - Yun Yan
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA
| | - Satish S C Rao
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Augusta University Medical Center, 1120 15th Street, AD 2226, Augusta, GA 30912, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
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: 94] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [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
|
7
|
Pelvic floor dysfunctions: how to image patients? Jpn J Radiol 2019; 38:47-63. [DOI: 10.1007/s11604-019-00903-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2019] [Accepted: 11/21/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
|
8
|
Prasad R, Gelder K, Wiles R. The patient's experience of defaecating proctography: Comparing magnetic resonance with conventional fluoroscopy techniques. Radiography (Lond) 2019; 25:24-27. [PMID: 30599825 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2018.07.002] [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] [Received: 03/09/2018] [Revised: 07/10/2018] [Accepted: 07/14/2018] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Fluoroscopy and MRI are currently used to investigate defaecation and pelvic floor dysfunction, with advantages and disadvantages to both modalities. Anecdotally it is suspected that MRI, allowing more privacy, may be better tolerated by patients but that symptoms may be more easily replicated with fluoroscopic technique due to the physiological position. The aim of this study was to evaluate the patient experience of both techniques to potentially help guide the choice of defaecating proctography modality in the future. METHODS This prospective study was conducted June 2015-March 2017 in a large teaching hospital. Patients undergoing fluoroscopy (FDP) or MR defaecating proctography (MRDP) completed a post-procedure questionnaire rating their satisfaction (1-5, 5 being most satisfied) of different aspects of the test. RESULTS 24 patients underwent FDP and 17 MRDP. Both procedures were scored highly in general for all questions with mean >4.1 and median 5, out of 5. Though not statistically significant, the mean scores for all aspects of the test were slightly higher for fluoroscopy than MR. As well as scoring higher for comfort (4.8 vs 4.4) and dignity maintained (4.6 vs 4.1), the patients who underwent fluoroscopy thought it was easier to replicate symptoms than the patient who underwent MR defaecating proctography (4.6 vs 4.2). CONCLUSION This study shows that both FDP and MRDP are well tolerated in the investigation of defaecation and pelvic floor dysfunction. FDP was scored consistently higher than MRDP, but this was not statistically significant. Thus, this study suggests that patient tolerance of the test is unlikely to be any worse for FDP than for MRDP. Clinicians and radiologists should take into account risks of radiation exposure as well as potential for surgical management when making their decision as to which test is appropriate. The authors recommend that if the patient is unable to replicate their symptoms in MRDP, fluoroscopy should be performed to ensure significant pathology is not being missed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Prasad
- Department of Radiology, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Prescot Street, Liverpool, L7 8XP, UK.
| | - K Gelder
- Department of Radiology, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Prescot Street, Liverpool, L7 8XP, UK.
| | - R Wiles
- Department of Radiology, Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Prescot Street, Liverpool, L7 8XP, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Grossi U, Di Tanna GL, Heinrich H, Taylor SA, Knowles CH, Scott SM. Systematic review with meta-analysis: defecography should be a first-line diagnostic modality in patients with refractory constipation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2018; 48:1186-1201. [PMID: 30417419 DOI: 10.1111/apt.15039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2018] [Revised: 07/16/2018] [Accepted: 10/08/2018] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Defecography is considered the reference standard for the assessment of pelvic floor anatomy and function in patients with a refractory evacuation disorder. However, the overlap of radiologically significant findings seen in patients with chronic constipation (CC) and healthy volunteers is poorly defined. AIM To systematically review rates of structural and functional abnormalities diagnosed by barium defecography and/or magnetic resonance imaging defecography (MRID) in patients with symptoms of CC and in healthy volunteers. METHODS Electronic searches of major databases were performed without date restrictions. RESULTS From a total of 1760 records identified, 175 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. 63 studies were included providing data on outcomes of 7519 barium defecographies and 668 MRIDs in patients with CC, and 225 barium defecographies and 50 MRIDs in healthy volunteers. Pathological high-grade (Oxford III and IV) intussuscepta and large (>4 cm) rectoceles were diagnosed in 23.7% (95% CI: 16.8-31.4) and 15.9% (10.4-22.2) of patients, respectively. Enterocele and perineal descent were observed in 16.8% (12.7-21.4) and 44.4% (36.2-52.7) of patients, respectively. Barium defecography detected more intussuscepta than MRID (OR: 1.52 [1.12-2.14]; P = 0.009]). Normative data for both barium defecography and MRID structural and functional parameters were limited, particularly for MRID (only one eligible study). CONCLUSIONS Pathological structural abnormalities, as well as functional abnormalities, are common in patients with chronic constipation. Since structural abnormalities cannot be evaluated using nonimaging test modalities (balloon expulsion and anorectal manometry), defecography should be considered the first-line diagnostic test if resources allow.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ugo Grossi
- Centre for Trauma and Surgery, and GI Physiology Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.,Proctology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Gian Luca Di Tanna
- Department of Econometrics, Statistics and Applied Economics, Riskcenter - IREA, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Henriette Heinrich
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Stuart A Taylor
- Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Charles H Knowles
- Centre for Trauma and Surgery, and GI Physiology Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - S Mark Scott
- Centre for Trauma and Surgery, and GI Physiology Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Kremel D, Riss S, Müller C, von Strauss M, Winstanley C, Winstanley J, Potter M, Paterson H, Collie M. Adverse obstetric history is not a risk factor for poor outcome after ventral rectopexy for obstructive defaecation syndrome. Colorectal Dis 2018; 20:1125-1131. [PMID: 30171744 DOI: 10.1111/codi.14392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2018] [Accepted: 07/02/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
AIM Ventral rectopexy (VR) has gained popularity in the management of obstructive defaecation syndrome (ODS) due to a symptomatic rectocele ± intussusception. Data on the efficacy and safety of VR are variable and there are few predictors of successful outcome. This study aimed to examine whether or not an adverse obstetric history influenced the functional outcome following VR for ODS. METHOD This was a retrospective study of a cohort of 76 consecutive patients who had undergone VR for ODS at a tertiary referral centre between 2012 and 2015. Patients were followed up by telephone questionnaire. The obstetric history and pre- and postoperative symptoms of ODS and faecal incontinence (FI) were obtained from telephone interviews. RESULTS In this cohort, symptoms of ODS were significantly improved by surgery, with 56% of patients showing a reduction of symptoms of 50% or more (P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that a lower body mass index (BMI; 24.4 vs 27.3 kg/m2 ; P < 0.05) and shorter duration of symptoms (7 vs 10 years; P < 0.05) led to a better outcome. VR had no effect on FI. Obstetric factors such as foetal weight, instrumental delivery, episiotomy, perineal tear and total number of deliveries did not influence outcomes. CONCLUSION Patients with a less straightforward obstetric history can be reassured that this should not adversely influence the functional outcome after VR for ODS. Colorectal surgeons who offer this surgery should warn patients with an elevated BMI or with longstanding symptoms that the operation may be less successful than for those with a lower BMI or shorter duration of symptoms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Kremel
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - S Riss
- Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - C Müller
- Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M von Strauss
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - C Winstanley
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - J Winstanley
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - M Potter
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - H Paterson
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| | - M Collie
- Department of Colorectal Surgery, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Abstract
Constipation, a condition characterized by heterogeneous symptoms, is common in Western society. It is associated with reduced physical health, mental health, and social functioning. Because constipation is rarely due to a life-threatening disease (for example, colon cancer), current guidelines recommend empiric therapy. Limited surveys suggest that fewer than half of treated individuals are satisfied with treatment, perhaps because the efficacy of drugs is limited, they are associated with undesirable side effects, or they may not target the underlying pathophysiology. For example, although a substantial proportion of constipated patients have a defecatory disorder that is more appropriately treated with pelvic floor biofeedback therapy than with laxatives, virtually no pharmacological trials formally assessed for anorectal dysfunction. Recent advances in investigational tools have improved our understanding of the physiology and pathophysiology of colonic and defecatory functions. In particular, colonic and anorectal high-resolution manometry are now available. High-resolution anorectal manometry, which is increasingly used in clinical practice, at least in the United States, provides a refined assessment of anorectal pressures and may uncover structural abnormalities. Advances in our understanding of colonic molecular physiology have led to the development of new therapeutic agents (such as secretagogues, pro-kinetics, inhibitors of bile acid transporters and ion exchangers). However, because clinical trials compare these newer agents with placebo, their efficacy relative to traditional laxatives is unknown. This article reviews these physiologic, diagnostic, and therapeutic advances and focuses particularly on newer therapeutic agents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David O. Prichard
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Adil E. Bharucha
- Clinical Enteric Neuroscience Translational and Epidemiological Research Program and Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 1st Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW To summarize the current recommendations for the evaluation and management of defecatory dysfunction in women and highlight key relationships between defecatory dysfunction and other pelvic floor disorders, including pelvic organ prolapse, fecal incontinence, and voiding dysfunction. RECENT FINDINGS Conservative measures including lifestyle modifications, pharmacotherapy, and biofeedback continue to be the mainstay of treatment with newer therapies emerging. Physiologic testing and/or radiologic imaging should be considered for those who fail conservative therapy or are clinically complex. Surgical management is appropriate for carefully selected patients with anatomic causes of defecatory dysfunction. Further research is needed on surgical outcomes and patient expectations. SUMMARY Pelvic floor disorders, including defecatory dysfunction, have a significant societal impact and are highly prevalent among women. Given its potential complexity, a broader focus is needed when evaluating women with defecatory symptoms and effective treatment may require multidisciplinary care.
Collapse
|
13
|
Carrington EV, Scott SM, Bharucha A, Mion F, Remes-Troche JM, Malcolm A, Heinrich H, Fox M, Rao SS. Expert consensus document: Advances in the evaluation of anorectal function. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 15:309-323. [PMID: 29636555 PMCID: PMC6028941 DOI: 10.1038/nrgastro.2018.27] [Citation(s) in RCA: 131] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Faecal incontinence and evacuation disorders are common, impair quality of life and incur substantial economic costs worldwide. As symptoms alone are poor predictors of underlying pathophysiology and aetiology, diagnostic tests of anorectal function could facilitate patient management in those cases that are refractory to conservative therapies. In the past decade, several major technological advances have improved our understanding of anorectal structure, coordination and sensorimotor function. This Consensus Statement provides the reader with an appraisal of the current indications, study performance characteristics, clinical utility, strengths and limitations of the most widely available tests of anorectal structure (ultrasonography and MRI) and function (anorectal manometry, neurophysiological investigations, rectal distension techniques and tests of evacuation, including defecography). Additionally, this article provides our consensus on the clinical relevance of these tests.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma V. Carrington
- National Bowel Research Centre, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - S. Mark Scott
- National Bowel Research Centre, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Adil Bharucha
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo College of Medicine, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - François Mion
- Exploration Fonctionnelle Digestive, Hospital Edouard Herriot, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon I University and Inserm 1032 LabTAU, Lyon, France
| | - Jose M. Remes-Troche
- Laboratorio de Fisiología Digestiva y Motilidad Gastrointestinal, Instituto de Investigaciones Médico Biológicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Veracruz, México
| | - Allison Malcolm
- Division of Gastroenterology, Royal North Shore Hospital, and University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Henriette Heinrich
- National Bowel Research Centre, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Mark Fox
- Abdominal Center: Gastroenterology, St. Claraspital, Basel, Switzerland
- Clinic for Gastroenterology & Hepatology, University Hospital Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| | - Satish S. Rao
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia
| |
Collapse
|