Skip to main content
Log in

Anal manometric parameters: Predictors of outcome following anal sphincter repair?

  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

Abstract

Controversy exists over the utility of manometry in the management of fecal incontinence. In light of newer methods for the management of fecal incontinence demonstrating favorable results, this study was designed to evaluate manometric parameters relative to functional outcome following overlapping sphincteroplasty. Twenty women, 29 to 84 years of age (mean age 50 years), with severe fecal incontinence and large (≥50%) sphincter defects on ultrasound were studied. All participants underwent anal manometry (mean resting pressure, mean squeeze pressure, anal canal length, compliance), pudendal nerve terminal motor latency (PNTML) testing, and completed the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons fecal incontinence severity index (FISI) survey before and 6 weeks after sphincter repair. Statistical analysis for all data included the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Mann-Whitney test, and Spearman’s correlation. Significant perioperative improvement was seen in the absolute resting and squeeze pressures and anal canal length. Overlapping sphincteroplasty was also associated with significant improvement in fecal incontinence scores (FISI 36 vs. 16.4; P = 0.0001). Although no single preoperative manometric parameter was able to predict outcome following sphincteroplasty, preoperative mean resting and squeeze pressures as well as anal canal length inversely correlated with the relative changes in these parameters achieved postoperatively. These findings suggest that either the physiologic parameters studied are not predictive of functional outcome or the scoring system used is ineffective in determining function. The perioperative paradoxical changes in resting pressure, squeeze pressure, and anal canal length would support the use of overlapping sphincteroplasty in patients with significant sphincter defects and poor anal tone.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nelson R, Norton N, Cautley E, Furner S. Community-based prevalence of anal incontinence. JAMA 1995;274:559–561.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Nikiteas N, Korsgen S, Kumar D, Keighley MRB. Audit of sphincter repair, factors associated with poor outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:1164–1170.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Baig MK, Wexner SD. Factors predictive of outcome after surgery for faecal incontinence. BJS 2000;87:1316–1330.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Halverson AL, Hull T, Paraiso M, Floruta C. Outcome of sphincteroplasty combined with surgery for urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;44:1421–1426.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Halverson AL, Hull TL. Long-term outcome of overlapping anal sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 2002;45:345–347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Buie WD, Lowry AC, Rothenberger DA, Madoff RD. Clinical rather than laboratory assessment predicts continence after anterior sphincteroplasty. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;44:1255–1260.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Carty NJ, Moran B, Johnson CD. Anorectal physiology measurements are of no value in clinical practice. True or false? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1994;76:276–280.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen AS, Luchtefeld MA, Senagore AJ, MacKeigan JM, Hoyt C. Pudendal nerve latency. Does it predict outcome of anal sphincter repair? Dis Colon Rectum 1998;41:1005–1009.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Liberman H, Faria J, Ternent CA, Blatchford GJ, Christensen MA, Thorson AG. A prospective evaluation of the value of anorectal physiology in the management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;44:1567–1574.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sangwan YP, Coller J, Barrett RC, Murray JJ, Roberts P, Schoetz DJ. Unilateral pudendal neuropathy. Significance and implications. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:249–251.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sangwan YP, Coller JA, Barrett RC, Roberts PL, Murray JJ, Rusin L, Schoetz DJ. Unilateral pudendal neuropathy. Impact on outcome of anal sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:686–689.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Yip B, Barrett R, Coller J, Marcello P, Murray J, Roberts P, Rusin L, Schoetz D. Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency testing: Assessing the educational learning curve. Dis Colon Rectum 2002;45:184–187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Oliveira L, Pfeifer J, Wexner SD. Physiological and clinical outcome of anterior sphincteroplasy. BJS 1996;83:502–505.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Ha HT, Fleshman JW, Smith M, Read T, Kodner IJ, Birnbaum EH. Manometric squeeze pressure difference parallels functional outcome after overlapping sphincter reconstruction. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;44:655–660.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Church JM, Saad R, Schroeder T, Fazio VW, Lavery IC, Oakley JR, Milsom JW, Tuckson W. Predicting the functional result of anastomoses to the anus: The paradox of preoperative anal resting pressure. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:895–900.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tracy Hull M.D..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gearhart, S., Hull, T., Floruta, C. et al. Anal manometric parameters: Predictors of outcome following anal sphincter repair?. J Gastrointest Surg 9, 115–120 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2004.04.001

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2004.04.001

Key words

Navigation