Digestive Diseases and Sciences

, Volume 54, Issue 11, pp 2503–2511 | Cite as

Discriminative Value of Anorectal Manometry in Clinical Practice

Original Article

Abstract

Guidelines recommend anorectal manometry in patients with fecal incontinence and chronic constipation. However, limited evidence supports the utility of manometric testing. We retrospectively reviewed tracings obtained between November 2005 and May 2008. A total of 298 patients (86% women; average age 52 years) were included. The main indications were incontinence (51%) and constipation (42%). Patients suffering from incontinence were older and had lower resting and squeeze pressure compared to continent patients. However, the discriminative power of manometric pressure data was poor, with low sensitivity and specificity. An abnormal straining pattern suggesting dyssynergic defecation was seen in 43% of constipated patients compared to 13% of patients with fecal incontinence. A concordance between manometric patterns and the balloon expulsion test was seen in 72%. The low sensitivity and specificity of manometric parameters does not support the routine use of anorectal manometry in patients with defecation disorders.

Keywords

Fecal incontinence Constipation Anal sphincter function Dyssynergic defecation 

References

  1. 1.
    Bharucha AE, Zinsmeister AR, Locke GR, et al. Prevalence and burden of fecal incontinence: a population-based study in women. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:42–49. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2005.04.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Drossman DA, Li Z, Andruzzi E, et al. U.S. householder survey of functional gastrointestinal disorders. Prevalence, sociodemography, and health impact. Dig Dis Sci. 1993;38:1569–1580. doi:10.1007/BF01303162.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bharucha AE, Zinsmeister AR, Locke GR, et al. Symptoms and quality of life in community women with fecal incontinence. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1004–1009. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2006.01.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bharucha AE. Outcome measures for fecal incontinence: anorectal structure and function. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:S90–S98. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2003.10.014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Diamant NE, Kamm MA, Wald A, et al. Aga technical review on anorectal testing techniques. Gastroenterology. 1999;116:735–760. doi:10.1016/S0016-5085(99)70195-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alva J, Mendeloff AI, Schuster MM. Reflex and electromyographic abnormalities associated with fecal incontinence. Gastroenterology. 1967;53:101–106.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    American Gastroenterological Association. American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on anorectal testing techniques. Gastroenterology. 1999;116:732–735. doi:10.1016/S0016-5085(99)70194-0.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rao SSC. Diagnosis and management of fecal incontinence. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:1585–1604. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.40105.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lembo A, Camilleri M. Chronic constipation. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1360–1368. doi:10.1056/NEJMra020995.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wald A. Fecal incontinence in adults. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1648–1655. doi:10.1056/NEJMcp067041.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sun WM, Macdonagh R, Foster D, et al. Anorectal function in patients with complete spinal transection before and after sacreal posterior rhizotomy. Gastroenterology. 1995;108:990–998. doi:10.1016/0016-5085(95)90194-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sun WM, Donnelly TC, Read NW. Utility of a combined test of anorectal manometry, electromyography, and sensation in determining the mechanism of ‘idiopathic’ faecal incontinence. Gut. 1992;33:807–813. doi:10.1136/gut.33.6.807.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chan CLH, Scott SM, Williams NS, et al. Rectal hypersensitivity worsens stool frequency, urgency, and lifestyle in patients with urge fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004;48:134–140. doi:10.1007/s10350-004-0774-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gladman MA, Scott SM, Williams NS, et al. Clinical and physiological findings, and possible aetiological factors of rectal hyposensitivity. Br J Surg. 2003;90:860–866. doi:10.1002/bjs.4103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bielefeldt K, Enck P, Erckenbrecht JF. Sensory and motor function in the maintenance of anal continence. Dis Colon Rectum. 1990;33:674–678. doi:10.1007/BF02150743.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dobben AC, Terra MP, Deutekom M, et al. Anal inspection and digital rectal examination compared to anorectal physiology tests and endoanal ultrasonography in evaluating fecal incontinence. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2007;22:783–790. doi:10.1007/s00384-006-0217-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Norton C, Chelvanayagam S, Wilson-Barnett J, et al. Randomized controlled trial of biofeedback for fecal incontinence. Gastroenterology. 2003;125:1320–1329. doi:10.1016/j.gastro.2003.09.039.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rao SSC, Seaton K, Miller M, et al. Randomized controlled trial of biofeedback, sham feedback, and standard therapy for dyssynergic defecation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:331–338. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2006.12.023.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rieger NA, Wattchow DA, Sarre RG, et al. Prospective trial of pelvic floor retraining in patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 1997;40:821–826. doi:10.1007/BF02055440.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mitrani C, Chun A, Desautels S, et al. Anorectal manometric characteristics in men and women with idiopathic fecal incontinence. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1998;26:175–178. doi:10.1097/00004836-199804000-00005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Felt-Bersma RJ, Klinkenberg-Knol EC, Meuwissen SG. Anorectal function investigations in incontinent and continent patients. Differences and discriminatory value. Dis Colon Rectum. 1990;33:479–485. doi:10.1007/BF02052142.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Enck P, Kuhlbusch R, Lübke H, et al. Age and sex and anorectal manometry in incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 1989;32:1026–1030. doi:10.1007/BF02553874.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bielefeldt K, Enck P, Wienbeck M. Diagnosis and treatment of fecal incontinence. Dig Dis. 1990;8:179–188.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rao SS, Azpiroz F, Diamant N, et al. Minimum standards of anorectal manometry. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2002;14:553–559. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2982.2002.00352.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Deutekom M, Dobben AC, Terra MP, et al. Clinical presentation of fecal incontinence and anorectal function: what is the relationship? Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:351–361. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00927.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Prather CM. Physiologic variables that predict the outcome of treatment for fecal incontinence. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:S135–S140. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2003.10.008.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rao SS. Constipation: evaluation and treatment of colonic and anorectal motility disorders. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2007;36:687–711. doi:10.1016/j.gtc.2007.07.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vaizey CJ, Kamm MA. Prospective assessment of the clinical value of anorectal investigations. Digestion. 2000;61:207–214. doi:10.1159/000007759.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wexner SD, Jorge JM. Colorectal physiological tests: use or abuse of technology? Eur J Surg. 1994;160:167–174.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Damon H, Schott AM, Barth X, et al. Clinical characteristics and quality of life in a cohort of 621 patients with faecal incontinence. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23(9):845–851.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kapoor DS, Sultan AH, Thakar R, et al. Management of complex pelvic floor disorders in a multidisciplinary pelvic floor clinic. Colorectal Dis. 2008;10:118–123.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vasudevan SP, Scott SM, Gladman MA, et al. Rectal hyposensitivity: evaluation of anal sensation in female patients with refractory constipation with and without faecal incontinence. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2007;19:660–667. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2982.2007.00922.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chan CLH, Lunniss PJ, Wang D, et al. Rectal sensorimotor dysfunction in patients with urge faecal incontinence: evidence from prolonged manometric studies. Gut. 2005;54:1263–1272. doi:10.1136/gut.2005.071613.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Eckardt VF, Kanzler G. How reliable is digital examination for the evaluation of anal sphincter tone? Int J Colorectal Dis. 1993;18:95–97. doi:10.1007/BF00299335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hallan RI, Marzouk DEMM, Waldron DJ, et al. Comparison of digital and manometric assessment of anal sphincter function. Br J Surg. 1989;76:973–975. doi:10.1002/bjs.1800760934.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Siproudhis L, El Abkari M, El Aluoui M, et al. Low rectal volumes in patients suffering from fecal incontinence: what does it mean? Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005;22:989–996. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2005.02675.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kenefick NJ, Vaizey CJ, Nicholls RJ, et al. Sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence due to systemic sclerosis. Gut. 2002;51:881–883. doi:10.1136/gut.51.6.881.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Allgayer H, Dietrich CF, Rohde W, et al. Prospective comparison of short- and long-term effects of pelvic floor exercise/biofeedback training in patients with fecal incontinence after surgery plus irradiation versus surgery alone for colorectal cancer: clinical, functional and endoscopic/endosonographic findings. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2005;40:1168–1175. doi:10.1080/00365520510023477.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Terra MP, Deutekom M, Dobben AC, et al. Can the outcome of pelvic-floor rehabilitation in patients with fecal incontinence be predicted? Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008;23:503–511. doi:10.1007/s00384-008-0438-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Solomon MJ, Pager CK, Rex J, et al. Randomized, controlled trial of biofeedback with anal manometry, transanal ultrasound, or pelvic floor retraining with digital guidance alone in the treatment of mild to moderate fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 2003;46:703–710. doi:10.1007/s10350-004-6643-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gearhart S, Hull T, Floruta C, et al. Anal manometric parameters: predictors of outcome following anal sphincter repair? J Gastrointest Surg. 2005;9:115–120. doi:10.1016/j.gassur.2004.04.001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Maslekar S, Gardiner AB, Duthie GS. Anterior anal sphincter repair for fecal incontinence: good longterm results are possible. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:40–46. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.10.008.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Smout AJ. Manometry of the gastrointestinal tract: toy or tool? Scand J Gastroenterol. 2001;(suppl 234):22–28. doi:10.1080/003655201753265415.
  44. 44.
    Felt-Bersma RJ. Clinical indications for anorectal function investigations. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1990;(suppl 178):1–6. doi:10.3109/00365529009093143.
  45. 45.
    Wald A. Con: anorectal manometry and imaging are not necessary in patients with fecal incontinence. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:2681–2683. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00900_2.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Tomita R, Ikeda T, Fujisaki S, et al. Hirschsprung’s disease and its allied disorders in adults’ histological and clinical studies. Hepatogastroenterology. 2003;50:1050–1053.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chen F, Winston JH, Jain SK, et al. Hirschsprung’s disease in a young adult: report of a case and review of the literature. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2006;10:347–351. doi:10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2006.03.017.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tan FL, Tan YM, Heah SM, et al. Adult Hirschsprung’s disease presenting as sigmoid volvulus: a case report and review of literature. Tech Coloproctol. 2006;10:245–248. doi:10.1007/s10151-006-0288-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    De Lorijn F, Kremer LC, Reitsma JB, et al. Diagnostic tests in hirschsprung disease: a systematic review. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2006;42:496–505. doi:10.1097/01.mpg.0000214164.90939.92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Heyt GJ, Oh MK, Alemzadeh N, et al. Impaired rectoanal inhibitory response in scleroderma (systemic sclerosis): an association with fecal incontinence. Dig Dis Sci. 2004;49:1040–1045. doi:10.1023/B:DDAS.0000034569.85066.69.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bharucha AE, Wald A, Enck P, et al. Functional anorectal disorders. Gastroenterology. 2006;130:1510–1518. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2005.11.064.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rao SS, Ozturk R, Laine L. Clinical utility of diagnostic tests for constipation in adults: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:1605–1615. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.41845.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Minguez M, Herreros B, Sanchiz V, et al. Predictive value of the balloon expulsion test for excluding the diagnosis of pelvic floor dyssynergia in constipation. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:57–62. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2003.10.044.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Chiotakakou-Faliakou E, Kamm MA, Roy AJ, et al. Biofeedback provides long-term benefit for patients with intractable, slow and normal transit constipation. Gut. 1998;42:517–521.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Heymen S, Scarlett Y, Jones K, et al. Randomized, controlled trial shows biofeedback to be superior to alternative treatments for patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia-type constipation. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50:428–441. doi:10.1007/s10350-006-0814-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Chiarioni G, Salandini L, Whitehead WE. Biofeedback benefits only patients with outlet dysfunction, not patients with isolated slow transit constipation. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:86–97. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2005.05.015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rhee PL, Choi MS, Kim YH, et al. An increased rectal maximum tolerable volume and long anal canal are associated with poor short-term response to biofeedback therapy for patients with anismus with decreased bowel frequency and normal colonic transit time. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:1405–1411. doi:10.1007/BF02236637.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of GastroenterologyUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations