The incidence rate and characteristics of clinically diagnosed defecatory disorders in the community

Use of a footstool improves rectal balloon expulsion in some patients with defecatory disorders

BACKGROUND

Whether patients with defecatory disorders (DDs) with favorable response to a footstool have distinctive anorectal pressure characteristics is unknown. We aimed to identify the clinical phenotype and anorectal pressure profile of patients with DDs who benefit from a footstool.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of patients with high resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) and balloon expulsion test (BET) from a tertiary referral center. BET was repeated with a 7-inch-high footstool in those who failed it after 120 s. Data were compared among groups with respect to BET results.

KEY RESULTS

Of the 667 patients with DDs, a total of 251 (38%) had failed BET. A footstool corrected BET in 41 (16%) of those with failed BET. Gender-specific differences were noted in anorectal pressures, among patients with and without normal BET, revealing gender-based nuances in pathophysiology of DDs. Comparing patients who passed BET with footstool with those who did not, the presence of optimal stool consistency, with reduced instances of loose stools and decreased reliance on laxatives were significant. Additionally, in women who benefited from a footstool, lower anal pressures at rest and simulated defecation were observed. Independent factors associated with a successful BET with a footstool in women included age <50, Bristol 3 or 4 stool consistency, lower anal resting pressure and higher rectoanal pressure gradient.

CONCLUSION & INFERENCES

Identification of distinctive clinical and anorectal phenotype of patients who benefited from a footstool could provide insight into the factors influencing the efficacy of footstool utilization and allow for an individualized treatment approach in patients with DDs.

Utility of Anorectal Testing to Predict Outcomes With Pelvic Floor Physical Therapy in Chronic Constipation: Pragmatic Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We performed a clinical trial that aimed to inform the clinical utility of anorectal manometry (ARM) and balloon expulsion time (BET) as up-front tests to predict outcomes with community-based pelvic floor physical therapy as the next best step to address chronic constipation after failing an empiric trial of soluble fiber supplementation or osmotic laxatives.

METHODS

We enrolled 60 treatment-naïve patients with Rome IV functional constipation failing 2 weeks of soluble fiber supplementation or osmotic laxatives. All patients underwent ARM/BET (London protocol) followed by community-based pelvic floor physical therapy. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and 12 weeks. The primary end point was clinical response (Patient Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms instrument).

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients completed pelvic rehabilitation and the post-treatment questionnaire. Contemporary frameworks define dyssynergia on balloon expulsion time and dyssynergic patterns (ARM), but these parameters did not inform clinical outcomes (area under the curve [AUC], <0.6). Squeeze pressure (>192.5 mm Hg on at least 1 of 3 attempts; sensitivity, 47.6%; specificity, 83.9%) and limited squeeze duration (inability to sustain 50% of squeeze pressure for >20 seconds; sensitivity, 71.4%; specificity, 58.1%) were the strongest predictors of clinical outcomes. Combining BET with squeeze duration (BET greater than 6.5 seconds and limited squeeze duration) improved predictive accuracy (AUC, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.90). BET poorly predicted outcomes as a single test (AUC, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.38-0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Using ARM to evaluate squeeze profiles, rather than dyssynergia, appears useful to screen patients with chronic constipation for up-front pelvic floor physical therapy based on likelihood of response. BET appears noninformative as a single screening test (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04159350).

Recto-anal Pressures in Constipated Men and Women Undergoing High-Resolution Anorectal Manometry

BACKGROUND

In constipated individuals, high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRM) may suggest the presence of a defecatory disorder. Despite known physiological differences between men and women, our understanding of functional anorectal pathophysiology is based upon predominantly female cohorts. Results are generalized to men.

AIMS

To evaluate whether recto-anal pressure patterns in constipated men are similar to those in constipated women.

METHODS

The electronic health records at Mayo Clinic, Rochester were used to identify constipated adult patients, without organic anorectal disease, who had undergone HRM and balloon expulsion testing (BET) in 2018, 2019, and 2020. Comparative analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Among 3,298 constipated adult patients (2,633 women, 665 men), anal and rectal pressures were higher in men. Women more likely to have HRM findings suggestive of a defecatory disorder (39% versus 20%, P < 0.001). Women were more likely to exhibit a type 4 pattern (27% versus 14%, P < 0.001), and less likely to exhibit a type 1 pattern (14% versus 38%, P < 0.001), of dyssynergia. Men were more likely to have an abnormal balloon expulsion test (BET, 34% versus 29%, P = 0.006). Nominal logistic regression demonstrates that male sex, age over 50 years, reduced recto-anal gradient during simulated evacuation, and types 2 and 4 dyssynergia are associated with an abnormal BET.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large retrospective study, constipated men and women exhibited different patterns of dyssynergia both in the presence and absence of an abnormal BET. These findings were independent of sex-specific baseline physiological differences.

Alterations in brain activation patterns in women with functional defecatory disorder: A novel fMRI rectal balloon expulsion study

BACKGROUND

Functional defecatory disorders (FDD) are common among women. Despite the extensive research on peripheral mechanisms involved in FDD, the central-neural contribution to its pathophysiology remains poorly understood. We aimed to delineate specific supra-spinal regions involved in defecation and examine whether their activity, as measured by blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) signals, is different in FDD.

METHODS

We performed functional MRI (fMRI) with concurrent rectal manometry in 15 controls and 18 females with ROME III diagnosis of FDD. A block design was used and brain activation maps based on BOLD effect employing the generalized linear model were calculated for each subject. Statistical significance between groups was assessed by a Student t-test with cluster-based multiple comparisons correction (corrected p < 0.01).

KEY RESULTS

Simulated defecation was associated with activation of regions of primary and supplementary motor (SMA) and somatosensory cortices, homeostatic afferent (thalamus, mid-cingulate cortex, and insula), and emotional arousal networks (hippocampus and prefrontal cortex), occipital and cerebellum along with deactivation of right anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) in controls. Women with FDD had fewer regions engaged in defecation and BOLD activation was much decreased is areas related to executive-cognitive function (insula, parietal, and prefrontal cortices). Patients unlike controls showed activation in right ACC and otherwise had similar brain activation patterns during anal squeeze.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Our results provide evidence that distinct differences exist in supra-spinal control of defecation in key regions of motivational-affective regulation and executive-cognitive function, in patients with FDD as compared to controls.

Age- and Gender-Based Differences in Anorectal Function, Gastrointestinal Symptoms, and Constipation-Specific Quality of Life in Patients with Chronic Constipation

BACKGROUND

The effect of age and gender differences on anorectal function, symptoms severity, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with chronic constipation (CC) is not well studied. This study examines the impact of age and gender on anorectal function testing (AFT) characteristics, symptoms burden, and QoL in patients with CC.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 2550 adults with CC who completed AFT. Collected data include demographics, sphincter response to simulated defecation during anorectal manometry (ARM), balloon expulsion testing (BET), and validated surveys assessing constipation symptoms and QoL. DD was defined as both the inability to relax the anal sphincter during simulated defecation and an abnormal BET.

RESULTS

2550 subjects were included in the analysis (mean age = 48.6 years). Most patients were female (81.6%) and Caucasian (82%). 73% were < 60 years old (mean = 41) vs. 27% ≥ 60 years old (mean = 69). The prevalence of impaired anal sphincter relaxation on ARM, abnormal BET, and DD in patients with CC was 48%, 42.1%, and 22.9%, respectively. Patients who were older and male were significantly more frequently diagnosed with DD and more frequently had impaired anal sphincter relaxation on ARM, compared to patients who were younger and female (p < 0.05). Conversely, CC patients who were younger and female reported greater constipation symptoms severity and more impaired QoL (p ≤ 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with CC referred for anorectal function testing, men and those older than 60 are more likely to have dyssynergic defecation, but women and patients younger than 60 experience worse constipation symptoms and QoL.

Diagnostic Strategy and Tools for Identifying Defecatory Disorders

This article reviews the indications, techniques, interpretation, strengths, and weaknesses of tests (anal manometry, anal surface electromyography, rectal balloon expulsion test, barium and MRI defecography, assessment of rectal compliance and sensation, and colonic transit) that are used diagnose defecatory disorders in constipated patients. The selection of tests and the sequence in which they are performed should be individualized to and interpreted in the context of the clinical features. Because anorectal functions are affected by age, results should be interpreted with reference to age- and sex-matched normal values for the same technique.

Psychological and Nutritional Factors in Pelvic Floor Disorders

This article discusses the role of psychological and nutritional factors in gastrointestinal pelvic floor disorders such as dyssynergic defection and explores the use of multidisciplinary strategies to enhance treatment.

Anorectal manometry to diagnose dyssynergic defecation: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy

BACKGROUND

Chronic constipation is a common condition, and dyssynergic defecation underlies up to 40% of cases. Anorectal manometry is recommended to assess for dyssynergic defecation among chronically constipated patients but remains poorly standardized. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry and determine optimal testing parameters.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy including cohort studies of chronically constipated patients and case-control studies of patients with dyssynergic defecation or healthy controls. Meta-analysis was performed to determine summary sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

KEY RESULTS

A total of 15 studies comprising 2140 patients were included. Including all studies (estimating optimal diagnostic accuracy), the AUC was 0.78 [95% CI 0.72-0.82], summary sensitivity was 79% [61%-90%], and summary specificity was 64% [44%-79%] to diagnose dyssynergic defecation. In cohort studies only (estimating real-world diagnostic accuracy), the AUC was 0.72 [0.66-0.77], summary sensitivity was 86% [64%-95%], and summary specificity was 49% [30%-68%]. Employing three consecutive simulated defecation attempts improved sensitivity to 94%. A fourth simulated defecation maneuver with air insufflation may improve accuracy. Measuring anorectal pressures to identify complex dyssynergic patterns did not improve real-world diagnostic accuracy estimates over anal pressure measurement alone. Choice of manometry system did not impact diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Following the current iteration of the London consensus protocol (three simulated defecation attempts measuring anal relaxation), the role of anorectal manometry in evaluating dyssynergic defecation appears limited. Future iterations of this protocol may improve diagnostic accuracy.

ACG Clinical Guidelines: Management of Benign Anorectal Disorders

Benign anorectal disorders of structure and function are common in clinical practice. These guidelines summarize the preferred approach to the evaluation and management of defecation disorders, proctalgia syndromes, hemorrhoids, anal fissures, and fecal incontinence in adults and represent the official practice recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology. The scientific evidence for these guidelines was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process. When the evidence was not appropriate for Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, we used expert consensus to develop key concept statements. These guidelines should be considered as preferred but are not the only approaches to these conditions.

Imaging modalities for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with obstructed defaecation syndrome

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.

Making a Confident Diagnosis of Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is among the most common diagnoses made by medical providers and its symptoms are common causes for health care consultation. IBS is characterized by abdominal pain associated with abnormal stool consistency and/or frequency and is widely considered a diagnosis of exclusion, despite abundant evidence contradicting such an approach. A positive diagnosis is achieved through application of symptom-based clinical criteria, careful history and physical examination, evaluation for alarm sign/symptoms, and judicious use of diagnostic testing. This article reviews the symptom-based criteria for IBS and utility of diagnostic tests commonly included in the evaluation of IBS symptoms.

Rectal Distension Increased the Rectoanal Gradient in Patients with Normal Rectal Sensory Function

BACKGROUND

Frequent observation of abnormal manometric patterns consistent with dyssynergia in healthy volunteers has warranted the need for reassessment of the current methods to enhance the diagnostic value of anorectal manometry in functional defecatory disorders. Whether rectal distention at simulated evacuation will affect anorectal pressure profile and increase rectoanal gradient is not known.

METHODS

One hundred and eight consecutive patients with chronic constipation, 93 females, median age 53 years (interquartile range: 40-65), were studied. Simulated evacuation was performed firstly with empty balloon and subsequently after balloon distention to 50 and 100 ml. Anorectal pressures were compared. We also performed subgroup analysis in relation to outcome of balloon expulsion test (BET). In addition, we studied the effect of rectal distension on the rectoanal pressure gradient with respect to rectal sensory function.

RESULTS

Rectal balloon distension at simulated evacuation improved rectoanal gradient and decreased the rate of dyssynergia during high-resolution anorectal manometry. In subgroup analysis, the increase in rectoanal gradient and correction of dyssynergia with rectal distension was limited to the patients who had normal BET and normal rectal sensory function. Rate of anal relaxation, residual anal pressures, and rectoanal gradient were significantly different between patients with and without normal BET at 50 ml of rectal distension. Rectoanal gradient recorded only after rectal distension, along with BMI and maximum tolerable volumes, could predict BET results independently in patients with chronic constipation.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal distension during simulated evacuation will affect the anorectal pressure profile. Increase in rectoanal gradient and correction of dyssynergia was only significant in patients with normal rectal sensory function and normal BET.

Identifying the health care-initiated and self-initiated interventions used by women for the management of rectal emptying difficulty secondary to obstructive defecation: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to identify interventions used by women for the management of rectal emptying difficulty secondary to obstructive defecation.

INTRODUCTION

Rectal emptying difficulty is typically a symptom of obstructive defecation syndrome. Even though a range of interventions are already available for this condition, this review is necessary to increase understanding of what interventions women find useful and are acceptable for them. This depth of understanding will facilitate the development of a specific care pathway to support women living with rectal emptying difficulty secondary to obstructive defecation syndrome.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review will consider studies that include adult women (over 18 years of age) living in the community who have experienced difficulty with rectal emptying secondary to obstructive defecation and who have not had surgical intervention. Exclusion criteria include prolapse surgery and surgical techniques, oral laxatives, vaginal pessaries, cognitive impairment, pregnancy, and those residing in care homes.

METHODS

The databases to be searched include MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Emcare, AMED, Web of Science, Scopus, PROSPERO, Open Grey, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal, UK Clinical Trials Gateway, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry, JBI Evidence Synthesis, Epistemonikos, Cochrane Library, and gray literature. Studies conducted in English from any time period will be considered for inclusion. The titles and abstracts will then be screened by two independent reviewers for assessment against the inclusion criteria for the review.

Bionic measurement of defecation in a swine model

OBJECTIVE

Fecobionics was used to assess pressures, orientation, bending, shape, and cross-sectional area (CSA) changes during defecation. This study aimed to evaluate the device feasibility and performance in swine.

APPROACH

Twelve pigs had wired or wireless Fecobionics devices inserted in the rectum. The bag was distended to simulate feces in the rectum. Fecobionics data were acquired simultaneously during the whole experiment. Six pigs were euthanized immediately after the procedure for evaluation of acute injury to anorectum (acute group). The remaining pigs lived two weeks before euthanasia for evaluation of long-term tissue damage and inflammation (chronic group). Signs of discomfort were monitored.

MAIN RESULTS

All animals tolerated the experiment well. The chronic animals showed normal behavior after the procedure. Mucosal damage, bleeding, or inflammation was not found in either group. Fecobionics was defecated 1 min 35 s-61 min 0 s (median 8 min 58 s) after insertion. The defecation lasted 0 min 20 s-4 min 25 s (median 1 min 52 s). The device was almost straight inside rectum (160°-180°) but usually bended 5°-20° during contractions. The three pressure sensors showed simultaneous and identical increase during rectal or abdominal muscle contractions, indicating the location inside rectum. During defecation, the maximum rear pressure was 114.1 ± 14.3 cmH₂O whereas the front pressure gradually decreased to 0 cmH₂O, indicating the front passed anus. CSA decreased from 1017.1 ± 191.0 mm² to 530.7 ± 46.5 mm² when the probe passed from the rectum through the anal canal.

SIGNIFICANCE

Fecobionics provides defecatory measurements under physiological conditions in pigs without inducing tissue damage.

The patient with irritable bowel syndrome-type symptoms: when to investigate and how?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a very common disorder whose clinical presentation varies considerably between patients as well as within the same individual over time. Many of its symptoms, such as pain, diarrhea, constipation and bloating, may be manifestations of a host of other gastrointestinal diseases; some accompanied by increased mortality. This presents the clinician with a real dilemma: how to sensibly investigate the patient in which one suspects IBS but there is a nagging doubt that 'it could be something else'? Could one miss 'something serious'? This short review attempts to provide both an evidence-based response to these vexing questions and a practical guide to detecting alternative diagnoses in the subject with IBS-type symptoms.

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical features, patient demographics and the clinical context can help to significantly narrow the differential diagnosis of the individual with IBS-type symptoms and may permit a positive diagnosis of IBS. The advent of noninvasive serological and stool tests has greatly facilitated differentiation from celiac disease and inflammatory bowel disease, respectively. In the older, female diarrhea sufferer microscopic colitis should be considered. The role of bile acid diarrhea in the individual with diarrhea-predominant IBS is emphasized; the status of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth in IBS remain uncertain.

SUMMARY

Attention to detail in the clinical evaluation of the individual with IBS-like symptoms will facilitate a selective and targeted approach to investigation. Wherever indicated, widely available serological and fecal tests will serve to bolster the diagnosis by excluding other options. Proceeding to more invasive testing should be dictated by clinical presentation and scenario with the threshold for intervention being generally lower among those with prominent diarrhea.

Does sequential balloon expulsion test improve the screening of defecation disorders?

Background

A defecation disorder (DD) is a difficulty in evacuation documented by physiological exams. However, this physiological evaluation can be cumbersome, inaccessible and costly. Three “low-cost” tools to evaluate DD—a clinical DD score, the balloon expulsion test (BET) and a digital rectal examination (DRE) score were evaluated as separate or combined tests for DD screening.

Methods

This prospective study occurred between January 2015 and March 2019 in the Gastroenterology Department of a tertiary hospital. Besides the gold standard physiological tests, constipated patients answered the clinical DD score and were evaluated by DRE and BET [standard and variable volume (VV)].

Results

From 98 constipated patients, 35 (38.9%) were diagnosed with DD according to Rome IV criteria, mainly female (n = 30, 86%) with a median age of 60 years old. The clinical DD score revealed an AUC of 0.417 (SE = 0.07, p = 0.191). The DRE score displayed an AUC of 0.56 (SE = 0.063, p = 0.301). The standard BET displayed a sensitivity of 86%, specificity of 58%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 57% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 86%. The sequential VVBET followed by standard BET improved the BET performance regarding the evaluation of DD, with a sensitivity of 86%, specificity of 67%, PPV of 63% and NPV of 87%. The sequential BET had an OR 8.942, p > 0.001, CI 3.18–25.14, revealing to be the most significant predictor for DD screening.

Conclusion

The sequential BET is a low cost, well-performing DD screening tool, appropriate to the Primary Care Setting.

Constipation and Fecal Incontinence in the Elderly

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical features, and management of primary constipation and fecal incontinence in the elderly.

RECENT FINDINGS

Among elderly people, 6.5%, 1.7%, and 1.1% have functional constipation, constipation-predominant IBS, and opioid-induced constipation. In elderly people, the number of colonic enteric neurons and smooth muscle functions is preserved; decreased cholinergic function with unopposed nitrergic relaxation may explain colonic motor dysfunction. Less physical activity or dietary fiber intake and postmenopausal hormonal therapy are risk factors for fecal incontinence in elderly people. Two thirds of patients with fecal incontinence respond to biofeedback therapy. Used in combination, loperamide and biofeedback therapy are more effective than placebo, education, and biofeedback therapy. Vaginal or anal insert devices are another option. In the elderly, constipation and fecal incontinence are common and often distressing symptoms that can often be managed by addressing bowel disturbances. Selected diagnostic tests, prescription medications, and, infrequently, surgical options should be considered when necessary.

Mechanisms, Evaluation, and Management of Chronic Constipation

With a worldwide prevalence of 15%, chronic constipation is one of the most frequent gastrointestinal diagnoses made in ambulatory medicine clinics, and is a common source cause for referrals to gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons in the United States. Symptoms vary among patients; straining, incomplete evacuation, and a sense of anorectal blockage are just as important as decreased stool frequency. Chronic constipation is either a primary disorder (such as normal transit, slow transit, or defecatory disorders) or a secondary one (due to medications or, in rare cases, anatomic alterations). Colonic sensorimotor disturbances and pelvic floor dysfunction (such as defecatory disorders) are the most widely recognized pathogenic mechanisms. Guided by efficacy and cost, management of constipation should begin with dietary fiber supplementation and stimulant and/or osmotic laxatives, as appropriate, followed, if necessary, by intestinal secretagogues and/or prokinetic agents. Peripherally acting μ-opiate antagonists are another option for opioid-induced constipation. Anorectal tests to evaluate for defecatory disorders should be performed in patients who do not respond to over-the-counter agents. Colonic transit, followed if necessary with assessment of colonic motility with manometry and/or a barostat, can identify colonic dysmotility. Defecatory disorders often respond to biofeedback therapy. For specific patients, slow-transit constipation may necessitate a colectomy. No studies have compared inexpensive laxatives with newer drugs with different mechanisms. We review the mechanisms, evaluation, and management of chronic constipation. We discuss the importance of meticulous analyses of patient history and physical examination, advantages and disadvantages of diagnostic testing, guidance for individualized treatment, and management of medically refractory patients.

Chronic Constipation

Constipation is a common symptom that may be primary (idiopathic or functional) or associated with a number of disorders or medications. Although most constipation is self-managed by patients, 22% seek health care, mostly to primary care physicians (>50%) and gastroenterologists (14%), resulting in large expenditures for diagnostic testing and treatments. There is strong evidence that stimulant and osmotic laxatives, intestinal secretagogues, and peripherally restricted μ-opiate antagonists are effective and safe; the lattermost drugs are a major advance for managing opioid-induced constipation. Constipation that is refractory to available laxatives should be evaluated for defecatory disorders and slow-transit constipation using studies of anorectal function and colonic transit. Defecatory disorders are often responsive to biofeedback therapies, whereas slow-transit constipation may require surgical intervention in selected patients. Both efficacy and cost should guide the choice of treatment for functional constipation and opiate-induced constipation. Currently, no studies have compared inexpensive laxatives with newer drugs that work by other mechanisms.

A Randomized Controlled Trial on the Effects of Electromyographic Biofeedback on Quality of Life and Bowel Symptoms in Elderly Women With Dyssynergic Defecation

Dyssynergic defecation is a usual cause of chronic constipation in elderly women, with a negative impact on health-related quality of life. The present randomized controlled trial aims to evaluate the effects of behavioral treatment through electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BF) on quality of life and bowel symptoms in elderly women with dyssynergic defecation. Twenty chronically constipated elderly women, due to dyssynergic defecation, were enrolled in the study. Outcome measures included weekly stool frequency, anismus index, severity of patient-reported chronic constipation symptoms (abdominal, rectal, and stool symptoms), and overall measure of quality of life. After 1 month of baseline, participants were randomly assigned to either EMG-BF group (n = 10) or control group (n = 10). Three months after treatment, female patients were once again assessed following the same procedure in baseline. One-way multivariate analysis of variance MANOVA revealed no significant differences between the groups before treatment in any of the measured dependent variables (Wilks's λ = 0.74; F_6,13 = 0.77; p = 0.61). Likewise, univariate analysis showed no differences between the groups, either in terms of age (F_1,18 = 0.96; p = 0.34) or mean disease duration (F_1,18 = 2.99; p = 0.11). Three months after treatment, MANOVA revealed statistically significant differences between the groups (Wilks's λ = 0.29; F_6,13 = 5.19; p < 0.01). These differences were significant in all outcome measures. EMG-BF produces significant improvements in bowel symptoms and health-related quality of life of elderly women with dyssynergic defecation.

Effects of psychosensory stimulation on anal pressures: Effects of alfuzosin

BACKGROUND

Our aim is to explain the lack of clarity in the ways in which anxiety and depression, which are common in defecatory disorders (DD), may contribute to the disorder. In this study, we evaluate the effects of mental stress and relaxation on anal pressures and the mechanisms thereof.

METHODS

In 38 healthy women and 36 DD patients, rectoanal pressures were assessed at rest and during mental stressors (ie, word-color conflict [Stroop] and mental arithmetic tests) and mental relaxation, before and after randomization to placebo or the adrenergic α1 -antagonist alfuzosin.

KEY RESULTS

During the baseline Stroop test, the anal pressure increased by 6 ± 13 mm Hg (mean ± SD, P = 0.004) in healthy women and 9 ± 10 mm Hg (P = 0.0001) in constipated women. During mental arithmetic, the anal pressure increased in healthy (4 ± 8 mm Hg, P = 0.002) and constipated women (5 ± 9 mm Hg, P = 0.004). After relaxation, anal pressure declined (P = 0.0004) by 3 ± 4 mm Hg in DD patients but not in controls. Alfuzosin reduced (P = 0.0001) anal resting pressure (by 31 ± 19 mm Hg) vs placebo (16 ± 18 mm Hg). However, during the postdrug Stroop test, anal pressure increased (P = 0.0001) in participants who received alfuzosin but not placebo.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

In healthy controls and DD patients, mental stressors likely increased anal pressure by contracting the internal anal sphincter; relaxation reduced anal pressure in DD patients. Alfuzosin reduced anal resting pressure but did not block the Stroop-mediated contractile response, which suggests that this response is not entirely mediated by adrenergic α1 receptors.

Effects of Alfuzosin, an α1-Adrenergic Antagonist, on Anal Pressures and Bowel Habits in Women With and Without Defecatory Disorders

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Some patients with defecatory disorders (DD) have high anal pressures that may impede rectal evacuation. Alpha-1 adrenoreceptors mediate as much as 50% of anal resting pressure in humans. We performed a randomized, placebo-controlled study of the effects of alfuzosin, an alpha1-adrenergic receptor antagonist, on anal pressures alone in healthy women and also on bowel symptoms in women with DD.

METHODS

In a double-blind study performed from March 2013 through March 2017, anal pressures were evaluated before and after 36 women with DD (constipation for at least 1 year) and 36 healthy women (controls) were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups given oral alfuzosin (2.5 mg immediate release) or placebo. Thereafter, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to groups given oral alfuzosin (10 mg extended release) or placebo each day for 2 weeks. Participants kept daily diaries of bowel symptoms for 2 weeks before (baseline) and during administration of the test articles (treatment). Weekly questionnaires recorded the overall severity of constipation symptoms, bloating, abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting; overall satisfaction with treatment of constipation was evaluated at weeks 2 and 4. The primary endpoint was the change in the number of spontaneous (SBMs) and complete SBMs (CSBMs) between the treatment and baseline periods. We evaluated relationships between stool form, passage, and complete evacuation.

RESULTS

Alfuzosin reduced anal resting pressure by 32 ± 3 mm Hg versus 16 ± 3 mm Hg for placebo (P = .0001) and anal pressure during evacuation by 26 ± 3 mm Hg versus 16 ± 3 mm Hg for placebo, (P = .03). However, alfuzosin did not significantly increase the rectoanal gradient, SBMs or CSBMs compared with placebo. Both formulations of alfuzosin were well tolerated. Hard stools and the ease of passage during defecation accounted for 72% and 76% of the variance in the satisfaction after defecation, respectively, during baseline and treatment periods.

CONCLUSIONS

In a randomized trial, alfuzosin reduced anal pressure at rest and during simulated evacuation in healthy and constipated women, compared with placebo, but did not improve bowel symptoms in constipated women. This could be because the drug does not improve stool form or dyssynergia, which also contribute to DD. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT 01834729.

Audit of the diagnosis of rectal evacuation disorders in chronic constipation

BACKGROUND

Balloon expulsion test (BET) and high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRM) are used in diagnosis of rectal evacuation disorders (REDs); their performance characteristics are suboptimal.

METHODS

We audited records of 449 consecutive patients with chronic constipation (CC). We documented anal sphincter tone and contraction, puborectalis tenderness, and perineal descent on digital rectal exam (DRE); maximum resting and squeeze pressures, and rectoanal pressure gradient on HRM; weight or time to balloon expulsion; colonic transit, and area of rectal area on radiograph (RASF). We based the diagnosis of RED on ≥2 abnormalities on both DRE and HRM, excluding results of BET, as the performance of BET is being investigated. Results of RED vs non-RED and results obtained using tbBET vs wbBET groups were compared. We used multivariate logistic regressions to identify predictors of RED using different diagnostic modalities.

KEY RESULTS

Among 449 individuals, 276 were included (74 RED and 202 non-RED). Predominant exclusions were for no HRM (n = 79) or use of low resolution anorectal manometry (n = 77). Logistic regression models for abnormal tbBET showed time >60 seconds, RASF and age-predicted RED. For tbBET, the current cutoff of 60 seconds had sensitivity of 39.0% and specificity 93.0% to diagnose RED; on the other hand, applying the cutoff at 22 seconds, the sensitivity was 77.8% and specificity 69.8%.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

The clinical diagnosis of RED in patients with CC is achieved with combination of DRE, HRM and an optimized, time-based BET. Prospective studies are necessary to confirm the proposed 22 second cutoff for tbBET.

Recent advances in understanding and managing chronic constipation

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.

Evaluation and management of defecatory dysfunction in women

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.

Women's experiences of managing digitation: do we ask enough in primary care?

The aim of this paper was to consider the available evidence for the current management of pelvic organ prolapse, which is a common presentation in primary care. However, not all women will present, only presenting when symptoms become bothersome. Particular attention was paid to understanding the problem of rectocele and its influence on obstructive defaecation symptoms. The burden of rectocele and its consequences are not truly known. Furthermore, healthcare professionals may not always enquire about bowel symptoms and patients may not disclose them. Complex emotions around coping and managing stress add to the challenges with seeking healthcare. Therefore, the impact on the lived experience of women who have difficulty with rectal emptying can be significant. The review identified a dearth of knowledge about women living with the problem of obstructive defaecation resulting in the use of digitation. Improving the management of digitation, an under-reported problem, is necessary to improve the quality of life for women. Primary care needs to increase access to conservative measures for women struggling with bothersome symptoms, such as constipation, the need to digitate or anxiety.

Expert consensus document: Advances in the evaluation of anorectal function

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.

The assessment and management of defecatory dysfunction: a critical appraisal

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the advances in diagnostic modalities and management options for defecatory dysfunction and highlight the areas in need of further research.

RECENT FINDINGS

The diagnostic utility of high-resolution anorectal manometry (ARM), which has emerged as a promising tool for the diagnosis of defecatory dysfunction, appears to be questionable in differentiating disease from normal physiology. There also seems to be discrepancy between results of various tests of anorectal function in the diagnosis of defecatory dysfunction. New revisions in diagnostic criteria for defecatory dysfunction by Rome IV consortium, may enhance its diagnostic yield. Biofeedback remains to be the most effective evidence-based treatment option for patients with defecatory dysfunction. Anorectal pressure profile cannot predict or mediate the success of biofeedback. Biofeedback may improve the symptoms through central effects.

SUMMARY

Despite the advances in the ARM and defecography techniques, no one test has been able to be considered as the 'gold standard' for diagnosis of defecatory dysfunction. The mechanism of action of biofeedback in defecatory dysfunction remains poorly understood.

Surgical Interventions and the Use of Device-Aided Therapy for the Treatment of Fecal Incontinence and Defecatory Disorders

The purpose of this clinical practice update expert review is to describe the key principles in the use of surgical interventions and device-aided therapy for managing fecal incontinence (FI) and defecatory disorders. The best practices outlined in this review are based on relevant publications, including systematic reviews and expert opinion (when applicable). Best Practice Advice 1: A stepwise approach should be followed for management of FI. Conservative therapies (diet, fluids, techniques to improve evacuation, a bowel training program, management of diarrhea and constipation with diet and medications if necessary) will benefit approximately 25% of patients and should be tried first. Best Practice Advice 2: Pelvic floor retraining with biofeedback therapy is recommended for patients with FI who do not respond to the conservative measures indicated above. Best Practice Advice 3: Perianal bulking agents such as intra-anal injection of dextranomer may be considered when conservative measures and biofeedback therapy fail. Best Practice Advice 4: Sacral nerve stimulation should be considered for patients with moderate or severe FI in whom symptoms have not responded after a 3-month or longer trial of conservative measures and biofeedback therapy and who do not have contraindications to these procedures. Best Practice Advice 5: Until further evidence is available, percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation should not be used for managing FI in clinical practice. Best Practice Advice 6: Barrier devices should be offered to patients who have failed conservative or surgical therapy, or in those who have failed conservative therapy who do not want or are not eligible for more invasive interventions. Best Practice Advice 7: Anal sphincter repair (sphincteroplasty) should be considered in postpartum women with FI and in patients with recent sphincter injuries. In patients who present later with symptoms of FI unresponsive to conservative and biofeedback therapy and evidence of sphincter damage, sphincteroplasty may be considered when perianal bulking injection and sacral nerve stimulation are not available or have proven unsuccessful. Best Practice Advice 8: The artificial anal sphincter, dynamic graciloplasty, may be considered for patients with medically refractory severe FI who have failed treatment or are not candidates for barrier devices, sacral nerve stimulation, perianal bulking injection, sphincteroplasty and a colostomy. Best Practice Advice 9: Major anatomic defects (eg, rectovaginal fistula, full-thickness rectal prolapse, fistula in ano, or cloaca-like deformity) should be rectified with surgery. Best Practice Advice 10: A colostomy should be considered in patients with severe FI who have failed conservative treatment and have failed or are not candidates for barrier devices, minimally invasive surgical interventions, and sphincteroplasty. Best Practice Advice 11: A magnetic anal sphincter device may be considered for patients with medically refractory severe FI who have failed or are not candidates for barrier devices, perianal bulking injection, sacral nerve stimulation, sphincteroplasty, or a colostomy. Data regarding efficacy are limited and 40% of patients had moderate or severe complications. Best Practice Advice 12: For defecatory disorders, biofeedback therapy is the treatment of choice. Best Practice Advice 13: Based on limited evidence, sacral nerve stimulation should not be used for managing defecatory disorders in clinical practice. Best Practice Advice 14: Anterograde colonic enemas are not effective in the long term for management of defecatory disorders. Best Practice Advice 15: The stapled transanal rectal resection and related procedures should not be routinely performed for correction of structural abnormalities in patients with defecatory disorders.

Rectal gas volume: Defining cut-offs for screening for evacuation disorders in patients with constipation

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of rectal evacuation disorders (RED) is currently based on anorectal manometry (ARM) and evacuation tests in specialized laboratories; we recently showed higher rectal gas volume (RGV) and maximum rectal gas transaxial area (MRGTA) measured on abdominal and pelvic computed tomography (CT) in patients with documented RED.The aim of this study was to obtain cut-off values of RGV, MRGTA, and rectal area on scout film (RASF) to differentiate constipated patients with RED from those without RED, based on ARM, balloon expulsion test (BET), and colon transit test.

METHODS

We identified 118 constipated patients (65 with RED) with prior record of CT. Using standard CT software, we used a variable region of interest (ROI) program to measure RGV, MRTGA, and RASF, as previously described. We constructed receiver operating characteristics curves based on different values, and we estimated AUC, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) to detect RED in patients with constipation.

KEY RESULTS

Receiver operating characteristics of the models to predict RED showed AUC 0.751 for RGV and 0.737 for MRGTA (both P<.001), and 0.623 for RASF (P=.029). At specificity of 90%, RGV of 30 mL had a PPV 77.3%, MRGTA of 10 cm² had a PPV 75.0%, and RFAS of 9 cm² had a PPV of 68.8% for identifying constipated patients with RED.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Rectal gas measurements on abdominal imaging may indicate RED in patients with constipation. At ~90% specificity for RED, RGV of 20 or 30 mL or MRGTA of 10 cm² on CT has PPV ~75%, and RASF of >9 cm² has PPV of ~69%.

Gender differences in chronic constipation on anorectal motility

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology of chronic constipation (CC) skews toward female predominance, yet men make up an important component of those suffering from CC. We sought to determine whether there are sex-specific differences in symptoms and physiologic parameters on anorectal manometry (ARM).

METHODS

We performed a case-control analysis of sequential men and age-matched women (2:1 ratio) presenting for ARM as part of the evaluation of CC. We collected physiologic parameters derived from 3D high-resolution ARM in addition to the ROME III constipation module and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20) questionnaires. We analyzed univariate, sex-specific differences in ARM physiologic parameters and PFDI-20 parameters and adjusted for putative confounders using multivariate logistic regression.

KEY RESULTS

Our study enrolled 80 men and 165 age-matched women. Men had a higher median sphincter resting pressure (81.2 vs 75.2 mm Hg, P=.01) and mean squeeze pressure (257.0 vs 170.5 mm Hg, P<.0001) than women. Although men reported significantly less severe straining and incomplete evacuation, they had greater mean rectoanal pressure differential (-106.7 vs -71.1 mm Hg, P<.0001), smaller mean defecation index (0.17 vs 0.27, P=.03) and higher volume threshold for urgency (115.2 v. 103.4 mL, P=.03). However, women were more likely to have abnormal balloon expulsion time (BET) than men (52.7% vs 35.0%, P=.01). After multivariate analysis, male gender was the only independent predictor of a normal BET (OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.27-0.86, P=.01).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Men and women with CC differ with regard to symptom severity and physiologic parameters derived from ARM suggesting differences in their pathophysiology.

Reproducibility of high-definition (3D) manometry and its agreement with high-resolution (2D) manometry in women with fecal incontinence

BACKGROUND

While widely used in clinical practice, the reproducibility of high-definition anorectal manometry (HD-ARM) remains unclear. We evaluated the intra-individual reproducibility of HD-ARM and compared pressures measured with HD-ARM and high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM).

METHODS

Thirty-six women with fecal incontinence had an initial HD-ARM (HD-ARM1); on the same day, after randomization, 21 had a second (HD-ARM2). Sixteen women had a third (HD-ARM3) 4 weeks later. Twenty-five had also been evaluated by HR-ARM previously. Rectoanal pressures were assessed at rest, during squeeze and simulated evacuation. Concordance among pressures was assessed with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC).

KEY RESULTS

Anal resting and squeeze pressures measured with HD-ARM were reproducible on the same and different days; for average resting pressures of HD-ARM1 vs HD-ARM2, CCC = 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-0.94), and for HD-ARM1 vs HD-ARM3, CCC = 0.60 (95% CI: 0.28-0.93). For maximum squeeze pressures of HD-ARM1 vs HD-ARM2, CCC = 0.86 (95% CI: 0.75-0.97), and for HD-ARM1 vs HD-ARM3, CCC = 0.56 (95% CI: 0.21-0.91). The rectoanal gradient during evacuation was significantly concordant between HD-ARM1 and HD-ARM2 but not HD-ARM1 and HD-ARM3. Resting (CCC = 0.38 [95% CI: 0.14-0.62]) and squeeze pressures (CCC = 0.73 [95% CI: 0.57-0.89]) measured with HD-ARM1 and HR-ARM were also concordant.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Among women with fecal incontinence, measurements with HD-ARM were reproducible on the same (anal resting and squeeze pressures and rectoanal gradient during evacuation) and different days (anal resting and squeeze pressures) and correlated with HR-ARM measurements. These findings support use of HD-ARM and HR-ARM for longitudinal assessments of anal resting and squeeze pressures.

Management of pelvic floor disorders: biofeedback and more

OPINION STATEMENT

Defecatory disorders (DD) and fecal incontinence (FI) are common conditions. DD are primarily attributable to impaired rectoanal function during defecation or structural defects. FI is caused by one or more disturbances of anorectal continence mechanisms. Altered stool consistency may be the primary cause or may unmask anorectal deficits in both conditions. Diagnosis and management requires a systematic approach beginning with a thorough clinical assessment. Symptoms do not reliably differentiate a DD from other causes of constipation such as slow or normal transit constipation. Therefore, all constipated patients who do not adequately respond to medical therapy should be considered for anorectal testing to identify a DD. Preferably, two tests indicating impaired defecation are required to diagnose a DD. Patients with DD, or those for whom testing is not available and the clinical suspicion is high, should be referred for biofeedback-based pelvic floor physical therapy. Patients with FI should be managed with lifestyle modifications, pharmacotherapy for bowel disturbances, and management of local anorectal problems (e.g., hemorrhoids). When these measures are not beneficial, anorectal testing and pelvic floor retraining with biofeedback therapy should be considered. Sacral nerve stimulation or perianal bulking could be considered in patients who have persistent symptoms despite optimal management of bowel disturbances and pelvic floor retraining.

An update on anorectal disorders for gastroenterologists

Gastroenterologists frequently encounter pelvic floor disorders, which affect 10% to 15% of the population. The anorectum is a complex organ that collaborates with the pelvic floor muscles to preserve fecal continence and enable defecation. A careful clinical assessment is critical for the diagnosis and management of defecatory disorders and fecal incontinence. Newer diagnostic tools (eg, high-resolution manometry and magnetic resonance defecography) provide a refined understanding of anorectal dysfunctions and identify phenotypes in defecatory disorders and fecal incontinence. Conservative approaches, including biofeedback therapy, are the mainstay for managing these disorders; new minimally invasive approaches may benefit a subset of patients with fecal incontinence, but more controlled studies are needed. This mini-review highlights advances, current concepts, and controversies in the area.