Skip to main content
Log in

Observer variation in the radiological measurement of the anorectal angle

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Determination of the anorectal angle (ARA) and the position of the pelvic floor is, theoretically, very important in understanding the mechanisms of anorectal continence and defaecation. The variability in the measurement of the ARA was analyzed. Nine experts drew the rectal axis either as a line along the posterior wall of the distal rectum or as the central axis of the rectal lumen on the outlines of 18 representative proctographic images. The standard deviations and ranges of the mean values of each ARA were comparable but large in both methods. On average, the S.D. was 8° and the range value about 23°. Inter-observer variation was not related to the magnitude of the ARA, but rather to the anorectal configuration. Drawing a line along the posterior distal rectal wall is difficult when it is irregular or when the puborectalis impression is indistinct. The central rectal axis is difficult to draw when the junction between the upper and lower rectum is ill defined or when the outlines of the distal rectum are asymmetric e.g by the presence of a rectocele. Thus, the variability of both methods was not strongly interrelated (r=0.68 for the median values). It is concluded that, in general, radiologic assessment of the ARA is not reliable enough for comparative investigation of the dynamics of the anorectum.

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. Brown BSJ (1965) Defecography or anorectal studies in children including cinefluorographic observations. J Can Ass Radiol 16:66–76

    Google Scholar 

  2. Phillips SF, Edwards AW (1965) Some aspects of anal continence and defaecation. Gut 6:396–405

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tagart REB (1966) The anal canal and rectum: their varying relationship and its effect on anal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 9:449–452

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brodén B, Snellman B (1968) Procidentia of the rectum studied with cineradiography. A contribution to the discussion of causative mechanism. Dis Colon Rectum 11:330–347

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kerremans R (1968) Radio-cinematographic examination of the rectum and the anal canal in cases of rectal constipation. A radio-cinematographic and physical explanation of dyschezia. Acta Gastro-Ent Belg 31:561–570

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bartolo DCC, Read NW, Jarratt JA, Read MG, Donnelly TC, Johnson AG (1983) Differences in anal sphincter function and clinical presentation in patients with pelvic floor descent. Gastroenterology 85:68–75

    Google Scholar 

  8. Preston DM, Lennard-Jones JE, Thomas BM (1983) The balloon proctogram. Br J Surg 71:29–32

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lahr CJ, Rothenberger DA, Jensen LL, Goldberg SM (1986) Balloon topography: a simple method of evaluating anal function. Dis Colon Rectum 29:1–5

    Google Scholar 

  10. Barkel DC, Pemberton JH, Pezim ME, Phillips SF, Kelly KA, Brown ML (1988) Scintigraphic assessment of the anorectal angle in health and after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Ann Surg 208:42–49

    Google Scholar 

  11. Parks AG, Porter NH, Hardcastle JN (1966) The syndrome of the descending perineum. Proc R Soc Med 59:477–482

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hardcastle JD, Parks AG (1970) A study of anal incontinence and some principles of surgical treatment. Proc R Soc Med 63:116–118

    Google Scholar 

  13. Finlay IG, Bartolo DCC, Bartram CI, Ekberg O, Fork FT, Kodner I, Kuijpers JHC, Mahieu PHG, Shorvon PJ, Stevenson GW, Womack N (1988) Symposium: proctography. Int J Colorect Dis 3:67–89

    Google Scholar 

  14. Skomorowska E, Hegedius V (1987) Sex differences in anorectal angle and perineal descent. Gastrointest Radiol 12:353–355

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hero M, Arhan P, Deyroede G, Jehannin B, Faverdin C, Babin C, Pellerin D (1985) Measuring the anorectal angle. J Biomed Eng 7:321–325

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  17. Turnbull GK, Bartram CI, Lennard-Jones JE (1988) Radiologic studies of rectal evacuation in adults with idiopathic constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 31:190–197

    Google Scholar 

  18. Shorvon PJ, McHugh S, Diamant NE, Somers S (1989) Defecography in normal volunteers: results and implications. Gut 30:1737–1749

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kuijpers JHC (1984) Fecal incontinence and the anorectal angle. Neth J Surg 36:20–23

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Penninckx, F., Debruyne, C., Lestar, B. et al. Observer variation in the radiological measurement of the anorectal angle. Int J Colorect Dis 5, 94–97 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00298477

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00298477

Keywords

Navigation