Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

MR-defecography in obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS): technique, diagnostic criteria and grading

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Techniques in Coloproctology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of a magnetic resonance (MR)-based classification system of obstructive defecation syndrome (ODS) to guide physicians in patient management.

Methods

The medical records and imaging series of 105 consecutive patients (90 female, 15 male, aged 21–78 years, mean age 46.1 ± 5.1 years) referred to our center between April 2011 and January 2012 for symptoms of ODS were retrospectively examined. After history taking and a complete clinical examination, patients underwent MR imaging according to a standard protocol using a 0.35 T permanent field, horizontally oriented open-configuration magnet. Static and dynamic MR-defecography was performed using recognized parameters and well-established diagnostic criteria.

Results

Sixty-seven out of 105 (64 %) patients found the prone position more comfortable for the evacuation of rectal contrast while 10/105 (9.5 %) were unable to empty their rectum despite repeated attempts. Increased hiatus size, anterior rectocele and focal or extensive defects of the levator ani muscle were the most frequent abnormalities (67.6, 60.0 and 51.4 %, respectively). An MR-based classification was developed based on the combinations of abnormalities found: Grade 1 = functional abnormality, including paradoxical contraction of the puborectalis muscle, without anatomical defect affecting the musculo-fascial structures; Grade 2 = functional defect associated with a minor anatomical defect such as rectocele ≤2 cm in size and/or first-degree intussusception; Grade 3 = severe defects confined to the posterior anatomical compartment, including >2 cm rectocele, second- or higher-degree intussusception, full-thickness external rectal prolapse, poor mesorectal posterior fixation, rectal descent >5 cm, levator ani muscle rupture, ballooning of the levator hiatus and focal detachment of the endopelvic fascia; Grade 4 = combined defects of two or three pelvic floor compartments, including cystocele, hysterocele, enlarged urogenital hiatus, fascial tears enterocele or peritoneocele; Grade 5 = changes after failed surgical repair abscess/sinus tracts, rectal pockets, anastomotic strictures, small uncompliant rectum, kinking and/or lateral shift of supra-anastomotic portion and pudendal nerve entrapment.

Conclusions

According to our classification, Grades 1 and 2 may be amenable to conservative therapy; Grade 3 may require surgical intervention by a coloproctologist; Grade 4 would need a combined urogynecological and coloproctological approach; and Grade 5 may require an even more complex multidisciplinary approach. Validation studies are needed to assess whether this MR-based classification system leads to a better management of patients with ODS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lienemann A, Anthuber C, Baron A, Kohz P, Reiser M (1997) Dynamic MR colpocystorectography assessing pelvic floor descent. Eur Radiol 7:1309–1317

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Pucciani F, Rottoli ML, Bologna A et al (1998) Pelvic floor dyssynergia and bimodal rehabilitation: results of combined pelviperineal kinesitherapy and biofeedback training. Int J Colorectal Dis 13:124–130

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Karlbom U, Graf W, Nilsson S, Påhlman LL (1996) Does surgical repair of a rectocele improve rectal emptying? Dis Colon Rectum 39:1296–1302

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Lehur PA, Stuto A, Fantoli M et al (2008) Outcomes of stapled transanal rectal resection vs. biofeedback for the treatment of outlet obstruction associated with rectal intussusceptions and rectocele: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1611–1618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Maglinte DD, Kelvin FM, Fitzgerald K, Hale DS, Benson JT (1999) Association of compartment defects in pelvic floor dysfunction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:439–444

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Healy JC, Halligan S, Resnek RH et al (1997) Dynamic MR imaging compared with evacuation proctography when evaluating anorectal configuration and pelvic floor movement. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:775–779

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schoenenberger AW, Debatin JF, Guldenschuh I, Hany TF, Steiner P, Krestin GP (1998) Dynamic MR defecography with a superconducting, open-configuration MR system. Radiology 206:641–646

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kelvin FM, Maglinte DD, Hale DS, Benson JT (2000) Female pelvic organ prolapse: a comparison of triphasic dynamic MR imaging and triphasic fluoroscopic cystocolpoproctography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:81–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Roos JE, Weishaupt D, Wildermuth S, Willmann JK, Marineck B, Hilfiker PR (2002) Experience of 4 years with open MR defecography: pictorial review of anorectal anatomy and disease. Radiographics 22:817–832

    Google Scholar 

  10. Piloni V, Fusco F, Dalla Rovere S et al (2007) MR-defecography in obstructed defecation: a simplified technique and classification system. Urodinamica 17:28–34

    Google Scholar 

  11. Longstreth GF, Thompson G, Chey WD, Houghton LA, Mearin F, Spiller RCL (2006) Functional bowel disorders. Gastroenterology 130:1480–1491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Altomare DF, Spazzafumo L, Rinaldi M, Dodi G, Ghiselli R, Piloni V (2007) Set-up and statistical validation of a new scoring system for obstructed defaecation syndrome. Colorectal Dis 10:84–88

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Spazzafumo L, Piloni V (1999) Rectal constipation and clinical decision-making: multiple correspondence analysis of defecographic findings. Tech Coloproctol 4:117–121

    Google Scholar 

  14. Comiter CV, Vasavada SP, Barbaric ZL, Gousse AE, Raz SL (1999) Grading pelvic prolapse and pelvic floor relaxation using dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. Urology 54:454–457

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Stoker J, Halligan S, Bartram CI (2001) Pelvic floor imaging. Radiology 218:621–641

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bartram CI (2005) Functional anorectal imaging. Abdom Imaging 30:195–203

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Tunn R, DeLancey JO, Quint EE (2001) Visibility of pelvic organs support system structures in magnetic resonance images without an endovaginal coil. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:1156–1563

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Dietz HP, Shek C, Clarcke B (2005) Biometry oft he pubovisceral muscle and levator hiatus by three-dimensional pelvic floor ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 25:580–585

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Agachan F, Chen T, Pfeifer J, Reissman P, Wexner SD (1996) A scoring system to simplify evaluation and management of constipated patients. Dis Colon Rectum 3:681–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Knowles CH, Eccersly AJ, Scott SM, Walker SM, Reeves B, Lunnis PJL (2000) Linear discriminant analysis of symptoms on patients with chronic constipation. Validation of a new scoring system (KESS). Dis Colon Rectum 43:1419–1426

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mahieu PH, Pringot J, Bodart P (1984) Defecography: 1. Description of a new procedure and results in normal patients. Gastrointest Radiol 9:247–251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Mahieu PH, Pringot J, Bodart P (1984) Defecography: 2. Contribution to the diagnosis of defecation disorders. Gastrointest Radiol 9:253–261

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bartram CI, Turnbull GK, Lennard-Jones JE (1988) Evacuation proctography: an investigation of rectal expulsion in 20 subjects without defecatory disturbance. Gastrointest Radiol 13:72–80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Grassi R, Romano S, Micera O, Fioroni C, Boller B (2005) Radiographic findings of post-operative double stapled trans anal resection (STARR) in patients with obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS). Eur J Radiol 53:410–416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. DeLancey JO (1999) Structural anatomy of the posterior pelvic compartment as it relates to rectocele. Am J Obstet Gynecol 180:815–823

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Piloni.

Additional information

This article is discussed in the editorial available at doi:10.1007/s10151-013-0995-x.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Piloni, V., Tosi, P. & Vernelli, M. MR-defecography in obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS): technique, diagnostic criteria and grading. Tech Coloproctol 17, 501–510 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-013-0993-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-013-0993-z

Keywords

Navigation