Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although transanal ultrasound has rapidly become the test of choice for the diagnosis of anal sphincter injury, the accuracy and reliability of this technique are unknown. This study evaluates the accuracy and reliability of transanal ultrasound for anterior (obstetric-related) anal sphincter injury. METHODS: Sixty-two women underwent transanal ultrasound with hard-copy images obtained at 0.5-cm intervals from the anal verge to 2.5 cm into the anal canal. All transanal ultrasound procedures were also recorded on videotape. Two experienced ultrasonographers blinded as to the patients' clinical history and examination independently reviewed the images and videotape recordings for the presence or absence of anal sphincter injury. RESULTS: The accuracy of transanal ultrasound in 22 incontinent women with known anal sphincter injury was 100 percent. The accuracy of transanal ultrasound in 20 nulliparous women with intact anal sphincters was only 35 percent but improved to 50 percent after the “real time” videotape was reviewed (P=0.16) and further improved to 85 percent when interpretation was limited to the distal 1.5 cm of the anal canal (P=0.004). In these nulliparous women, intact internal sphincters were more accurately predicted than intact external sphincters (95vs. 85 percent;P=0.24). Measurement agreement between the two ultrasonographers was 68 percent (fair; kappa, 0.26) but significantly improved to 78 percent (moderate; kappa, 0.48;P=0.0001) when interpretation was limited to the distal 1.5 cm of the anal canal. Overall clinical agreement (final scan interpretation) was good (81 percent agreement; kappa, 0.61). Agreement was better for the internal sphincter (74 percent; fair; kappa, 0.36) than the external sphincter (61 percent; poor; kappa, 0.17;P=0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Although transanal ultrasound can accurately identify anterior anal sphincter injury when present, transanal ultrasound falsely identifies sphincter injury in at least 5 to 25 percent of normal anal sphincters. Only fair agreement in the interpretation of transanal ultrasound exists between experienced ultrasonographers. Both the accuracy and reliability of transanal ultrasound are significantly improved by limiting transanal ultrasound to the distal 1.5 cm of the anal canal.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Law PJ, Bartram CI. Anal endosonography: technique in normal anatomy. Gastrointest Radiol 1989;14:349–53.
Burnett SJ, Bartram CI. Endosonographic variations in the normal internal anal sphincter. Int J Colorectal Dis 1991;6:2–4.
Sultan AH, Nicholls RJ, Kamm MA, Hudson CN, Beynon J, Bartram CI. Anal endosonography and correlation within vitro andin vivo anatomy. Br J Surg 1993;80:508–11.
Papachrysostomou M, Pye SD, Wild SR, Smith AN. Anal endosonography in asymptomatic subjects. Scand J Gastroenterol 1993;28:551–6.
Eckardt VF, Jung B, Fischer B, Lierse W. Anal endosonography in healthy subjects and patients with idiopathic fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:235–42.
Nielsen MB, Hauge C, Rasmussen O, Sorensen M, Pedersen JF, Christiansen J. Anal sphincter size measured by endosonography in healthy volunteers' effective age, sex and parity. Acta Radiol 1992;33:453–6.
Tjandra JJ, Milsom JW, Stolfi VM,et al. Endoluminal ultrasound defines anatomy of the anal canal and pelvic floor. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:465–70.
Law PJ, Kamm MA, Bartram CI. A comparison between electromyography and anal endosonography in mapping external anal sphincter defects. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:370–3.
Law PJ, Kamm MA, Bartram CI. Anal endosonography and the investigation of rectal incontinence. Br J Surg 1991;78:312–4.
Burnett SJ, Speakman CT, Kamm MA, Bartram CI. Confirmation of endosonographic detection of external anal sphincter defects by simultaneous electromyographic mapping. Br J Surg 1991;78:448–50.
Felt-Bersma RJ, Questa MA, Koorevaar M,et al. Anal endosonography: relationship with anal manometry and neurophysiologic tests. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:944–9.
Tjandra JJ, Milsom JW, Schroeder T, Fazio VW. Endoluminal ultrasound is preferable to electromyography in mapping anal sphincteric defects. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:689–92.
Falk PM, Blatchford GJ, Cali RL, Christensen MA, Thorson AG. Transanal ultrasound and manometry in the evaluation of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:468–72.
Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Hudson CN, Nicholls JR, Bartram CI. Endosonography of the anal sphincter: normal anatomy in comparison with manometry. Clin Radiol 1994;49:368–74.
Deen KI, Kumar D, Williams JG, Olliff J, Keighley MR. Anal sphincter defects correlation between endoanal ultrasound and surgery. Ann Surg 1993;218:201–5.
Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Talbot IC, Nicholls RJ, Bartram CI. Anal endosonography for identifying external sphincter defects confirmed histologically. Br J Surg 1994;81:463–5.
Milsom JW. Anorectal ultrasound. In: Smith LE, ed. Practical guide to anorectal testing. 2nd ed. New York: Igaka-Shoin, 1995:283–7.
Orrom WJ, Wong WD, Rothenberger DA, Jensen LL, Goldberg SM. Endorectal ultrasound in the preoperative staging of rectal tumors. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:654–59.
Solomon MJ, McLeod RS, Cohen EK, Simons ME, Wilson S. Reliability and validity studies of endoluminal ultrasonography for anorectal disorders. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:546–51.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, June 22 to 26, 1997.
About this article
Cite this article
Sentovich, S.M., Wong, W.D. & Blatchford, G.J. Accuracy and reliability of transanal ultrasound for anterior anal sphincter injury. Dis Colon Rectum 41, 1000–1004 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237390
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237390