Normal values for high-resolution anorectal manometry in healthy young adults: evidence from Vietnam

Anorectal Manometry in Patients With Fecal Incontinence After Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis for Ulcerative Colitis: A Cohort Study

Background

Fecal incontinence commonly occurs in patients with ulcerative colitis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. There is a paucity of manometric data in pouch patients. We aimed to better define manometric parameters in pouch patients with fecal incontinence.

Methods

We compared clinical and manometric variables in ulcerative colitis patients with pouch and fecal incontinence to ulcerative colitis patients with pouch without fecal incontinence and to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Manometric data for the 3 cohorts were compared to established normative data. An independent-samples t-test was performed for continuous variables, and chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of incontinence in pouch patients (P < .05).

Results

Among 26 pouch patients with fecal incontinence (73% female), 26 pouch patients without fecal incontinence (35% female), and 84 patients with fecal incontinence without ulcerative colitis (68% female), there were no differences in anorectal pressures between patients with fecal incontinence. Lower pressures were observed in pouch patients with fecal incontinence compared to those without fecal incontinence. Resting pressure was similar between pouch patients with fecal incontinence and healthy controls (60.9 ± 36.1 mmHg vs. 66.9 ± 3.2 mmHg, P = .40). Female sex (P = .019) and defecatory disorders (P = .033) each independently predicted fecal incontinence in pouch patients.

Conclusions

Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have lower anorectal pressures compared to pouch patients without incontinence, though have similar pressures to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have similar resting pressures as healthy controls. Distinct manometric normative values for pouch patients are needed.

Study on 3D High-Resolution Anorectal Manometry Interrater Agreement in the Evaluation of Dyssynergic Defecation Disorders

Anorectal manometry measurements exhibit significant interrater variability. Newer techniques like 3D high-resolution anorectal manometry (3D-HRAM) have the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and our understanding of defecation disorders. However, the extent of interrater variability in 3D-HRAM is still unknown. Between January 2020 to April 2022, patients referred for pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) due to functional defecation complaints underwent 3D-HRAM testing. In a retrospective analysis, three expert raters independently evaluated the 3D-HRAM results in a blinded matter to assess interrater agreement. The evaluation also determined the level of agreement concerning dyssynergic patterns during simulated defecation. The 3D-HRAM results of 50 patients (37 females) were included. Twenty-nine patients had complaints of fecal incontinence, eleven patients had chronic constipation, and ten patients had several other complaints. There was a substantial agreement (kappa 0.612) between the raters concerning the 3D images on dyssynergic patterns during simulated defecation. Our study emphasizes the need for standardized guidelines in evaluating 3D-HRAM test results to reduce subjectivity and further improve agreement among raters. Implementing these guidelines could improve diagnostic consistency and enhance personalized treatment strategies, increasing the reliability and usefulness of 3D-HRAM testing in clinical practice.

To what extent are anorectal function tests comparable? A study comparing digital rectal examination, anal electromyography, 3-dimensional high-resolution anal manometry, and transperineal ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Anorectal function tests are helpful for objective investigation of anorectal (dys)function. A variety of tests are available, but there is no recommendation when to perform which test. Furthermore, which test is the most accurate is controversial and the correlation between these tests is not very clear. The aim of our study was to examine the correlation of anal pressures and the possibility to diagnose pelvic floor dyssynergia between digital rectal examination (DRE) and several anorectal function tests.

METHODS

Between January 2020 and April 2022, all men and women aged 18 to 80 years, treated at the Proctos Clinic, who were referred for pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) by the surgeon and underwent anorectal function tests, were included. DRE was performed to establish the anal pressure at rest and during squeeze and straining. Anorectal function tests included 3D high-resolution anal manometry (3D-HRAM), balloon expulsion test (BET), transperineal ultrasound (TPUS), and surface electromyography (s-EMG).

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients, 37 (74%) females, were included. Median age was 51 years. Twenty-three (62%) females had a history of two or more vaginal deliveries. The most frequent reason for referral for PFPT was fecal incontinence in 27 (54%) patients. The assessed pressures and pelvic floor function measured with DRE by the surgeon and the pelvic floor physical therapist during rest, squeeze, and straining correlated in 78%, 78%, and 84%, respectively. Correlation between DRE and 3D-HRAM or s-EMG was better for squeeze pressures than resting pressures. The correlation between s-EMG and 3D-HRAM was better during squeeze than at rest with an agreement of 59% and 37%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

DRE by an experienced investigator is of sufficient value for daily clinical practice to detect dyssynergia and to measure sphincter tone. Commonly performed anorectal function tests correlate poorly with DRE and with other anorectal function tests. When conservative treatment fails, further investigation is warranted; however, these results should be interpreted with caution. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD TO THE LITERATURE?: Anorectal function tests such as the 3D high-resolution anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion test, surface electromyography, and transperineal ultrasound are all frequently performed in the diagnostic workup in patients with defecation disorders. No previous study has compared these tests regarding their outcomes, nor has the interrater agreement been measured regarding the digital rectal examination by two experienced observers. Furthermore, transperineal ultrasound is in all probability not frequently used and therefore underexposed in the diagnostic workup of patients with dyssynergic defecation.