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

Faecal incontinence-a comprehensive review

Introduction

Faecal incontinence (FI) is a distressing and often stigmatizing condition characterised as the recurrent involuntary passage of liquid or solid faeces. The reported prevalence of FI exhibits considerable variation, ranging from 7 to 15% in the general population, with higher rates reported among older adults and women. This review explores the pathophysiology mechanisms, the diagnostic modalities and the efficiency of treatment options up to date.

Methods

A review of the literature was conducted to identify the pathophysiological pathways, investigation and treatment modalities.

Result and discussion

This review provides an in-depth exploration of the intricate physiological processes that maintain continence in humans. It then guides the reader through a detailed examination of diagnostic procedures and a thorough analysis of the available treatment choices, including their associated success rates. This review is an ideal resource for individuals with a general medical background and colorectal surgeons who lack specialized knowledge in pelvic floor disorders, as it offers a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms, diagnosis, and treatment of faecal incontinence (FI).

The Mexican consensus on fecal incontinence

Fecal incontinence is the involuntary passage or the incapacity to control the release of fecal matter through the anus. It is a condition that significantly impairs quality of life in those that suffer from it, given that it affects body image, self-esteem, and interferes with everyday activities, in turn, favoring social isolation. There are no guidelines or consensus in Mexico on the topic, and so the Asociación Mexicana de Gastroenterología brought together a multidisciplinary group (gastroenterologists, neurogastroenterologists, and surgeons) to carry out the «Mexican consensus on fecal incontinence» and establish useful recommendations for the medical community. The present document presents the formulated recommendations in 35 statements. Fecal incontinence is known to be a frequent entity whose incidence increases as individuals age, but one that is under-recognized. The pathophysiology of incontinence is complex and multifactorial, and in most cases, there is more than one associated risk factor. Even though there is no diagnostic gold standard, the combination of tests that evaluate structure (endoanal ultrasound) and function (anorectal manometry) should be recommended in all cases. Treatment should also be multidisciplinary and general measures and drugs (lidamidine, loperamide) are recommended, as well as non-pharmacologic interventions, such as biofeedback therapy, in selected cases. Likewise, surgical treatment should be offered to selected patients and performed by experts.

Gastrointestinal Tract Considerations: Part II: How Should a Rheumatologist Best Manage Common Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Complaints in Systemic Sclerosis?

Lower gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are a frequently encountered problem for clinicians managing patients with systemic sclerosis. The current management practices are focused on the treatment of symptoms with little information available on how to use GI investigations in daily practice. This review demonstrates how to integrate the objective assessment of common lower GI symptoms into clinical care with the aim of guiding clinical decision making. Understanding the type of abnormal GI function that is affecting a patient and determining which parts of the gut are impacted can help clinicians to target therapy more precisely.

Differences in Anorectal Manometry Values Among Women With Fecal Incontinence in a Racially, Ethnically, and Socioeconomically Diverse Population

IMPORTANCE

Anorectal manometry (ARM) is a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic tool that can both aid in identifying mechanisms contributing to fecal incontinence (FI) and inform management strategies. Consensus on standard reference range values has not been established, and women of varying racial and ethnic backgrounds are not well-represented in the current literature.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare ARM values between women of different racial and ethnic groups with FI.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of women with FI who underwent ARM at a tertiary health system in an urban underserved community between 2016 and 2021. Demographic information and ARM values were collected from the medical record. Socioeconomic status (SES) was represented by the percent of the population living below the poverty line according to zip code using U.S. census data. Anorectal manometry values were compared between racial and ethnic groups, and multivariable logistic regression was conducted to control for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight women were included in the analysis: 33% Hispanic, 22% Black, and 45% White. Hispanic and Black women had higher body mass index and higher rates of diabetes and loose stools and were of significantly lower SES compared with White women. Black and Hispanic women had significantly lower thresholds for volume at first sensation and higher mean anal squeeze pressure. Differences were maintained after controlling for body mass index, diabetes, SES, and diarrhea (P = 0.03 and P = 0.01, respectively). Other ARM values were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial and ethnic differences in ARM values among women with FI exist. Further studies are needed to determine whether these differences have an impact on symptom severity, treatment selection and outcomes, and patient satisfaction.

Diagnostics of Gastrointestinal Motility and Function: Update for Clinicians

Disorders of gastrointestinal (GI) tract motility and function are prevalent in the general population and negatively affect quality of life [...]

Anal Sphincter Defect and Fecal Incontinence

Anal sphincter defects can lead to fecal incontinence. The relationship between the extent of defect and continence is controversial. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the pelvis can assess anal sphincter defects. Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) is used to assess sphincter integrity in adults. We present a 17-year-old male with history of sexual abuse, rectal prolapse, and fecal incontinence. MRI showed a small defect that did not explain his clinical presentation. TRUS identified more extensive defects which were not picked up by MRI. The patient had rectopexy, and his rectal prolapse and fecal incontinence resolved. TRUS was superior in identifying sphincter defects compared with MRI. Our case also highlights that continence is possible despite large sphincter defects in pediatric patients. This may reflect the compensatory mechanism of residual sphincter in the absence of the aggravating factors like rectal prolapse.

Diagnosis and management of fecal incontinence in children and adolescents

Fecal incontinence (FI) is a commonly occurring disease of high concern. It is characterized by voluntary and involuntary defecation in children and adolescents. It is not only a physical disease but also a psychological and behavioral disorder. FI poses a serious burden on individuals and their families and therefore has become a social problem. Unfortunately, the management of FI among children is still a challenge because the etiology varies widely. Constipation has been found to be the most common cause, while sphincter dysfunction and neurogenic abnormalities may also play a role. Currently, no consensus guidelines exist, and the criteria for selecting optional methods remain unclear. It is therefore necessary to improve the efficacy of diagnosis and management strategies of FI in children. This review focused on the classification and etiology, discussed the diagnosis and management methods of FI in children and adolescents, and aimed to guide future studies.

Comment on “Diagnostic approach to faecal incontinence: What test and when to perform?”

We recently read with interest the article "Diagnostic approach to faecal incontinence: What test and when to perform?". This is a comprehensive and practical review, which has particular significance for guiding clinicians to improve the examination strategy. Although we appreciate their work very much, based on the in-depth analysis of this research, we found some detailed problems in the article and will give our comments in this letter. If the author can further improve the relevant research, it will be valuable.