Visiting a Coloproctology Patient: Rules and Suggestions

  • Carlo Ratto
  • Francesco Litta
  • Lorenza Donisi
  • Angelo Parello
Living reference work entry
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

A careful clinical examination remains of crucial importance in a patient affected by coloproctological diseases. These conditions have a significant impact on the patients’ quality of life and, moreover, are often associated to personality disorders or real psychiatric conditions: some measures are therefore needed to minimize the impact of the visit and to establish immediately an effective relationship of mutual trust.

It is therefore clear that the choice of where and how to visit a coloproctology patient is very important to properly address the diagnostic-therapeutic approach. A full coloproctologic examination should always provide a series of well-defined phases, with the evaluation of several different aspects of the same disease. For many common diseases treated in a proctology clinic, a proper clinical examination can address, or not, the patient to a subsequent assessment by radiology or anorectal physiology testing.

Growing literature evidences support the surgeon in the diagnosis of colorectal diseases and have highlighted the importance of treating these conditions in a specialist colorectal context.

Keywords

Fecal Incontinence Anal Fissure Anal Fistula Colorectal Surgeon Anorectal Manometry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Becker A, Koltun L, Sayfan J (2006) Simple clinical examination predicts complexity of perianal fistula. Colorectal Dis 8:601–604PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cirocco WC, Reilly JC (1992) Challenging the predictive accuracy of Goodsall’s rule for anal fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum 35:537–542PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coremans G, Dockx S, Wyndaele J, Hendrickx A (2003) Do anal fistulas in Crohn’s disease behave differently and defy Goodsall’s rule more frequently than fistulas that are cryptoglandular in origin? Am J Gastroenterol 98:2732–2735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Deshpande AR, Block N, Barkin JS (2009) Taking a closer look at the rectal examination: beyond the basics. Am J Gastroenterol 104:246–247PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dobbene AC, Terra MP, Deutekom M, Gerhards MF, Bijnen AB, Felt-Bersma RJ, Janssen LW, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J (2007) Anal inspection and digital rectal examination compared to anorectal physiology tests and endoanal ultrasonography in evaluating fecal incontinence. Int J Colorectal Dis 22:783–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eckardt VF, Kanzler G (1993) How reliable is digital examination for the evaluation of anal sphincter tone? Int J Colorectal Dis 8:95–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gans SL, Pols MA, Stoker J, Boermeester MA (2015) Guideline for the diagnostic pathway in patients with acute abdominal pain. Dig Surg 32:23–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Garcia-Aguilar J, Belmonte C, Wong WD, Goldberg SM, Madoff RD (1996) Anal fistula surgery. Factors associated with recurrence and incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 39:723–729PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. García-Olmo D, Pascual Migueláñez I (2010) A sonograph in the proctology clinic – an aid to the “learned finger”. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 102:1–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gebbensleben O, Hilger Y, Rohde H (2009) Patients’ views of medical positioning for proctologic examination. Clin Exp Gastroenterol 2:133–138PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Goldstein ET (1996) Outcomes of anorectal disease in a health maintenance organization setting. The need for colorectal surgeons. Dis Colon Rectum 39:1193–1198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grucela A, Salinas H, Khaitov S, Steinhagen RM, Gorfine SR, Chessin DB (2010) Prospective analysis of clinician accuracy in the diagnosis of benign anal pathology: comparison across specialties and years of experience. Dis Colon Rectum 53:47–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gunawardhana PA, Deen KI (2001) Comparison of hydrogen peroxide instillation with Goodsall’s rule for fistula-in-ano. ANZ J Surg 71:472–474PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hyman NH (1999) Impact of a colon and rectal surgeon on a general surgery residency training program. Dis Colon Rectum 42:249–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Isherwood J, Ashkir Z, Panteleimonitis S, Kumar N, Hemingway D, Miller AS, Norwood MN, Yeung JM (2013) Teaching digital rectal examination to medical students using a structured workshop-a point in the right direction? J Surg Educ 70:254–257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jimeno J, Vallverdú H, Tubella J, Sánchez-Pradell C, Comajuncosas J, Orbeal R, Hermoso J, Gris P, López-Negre JL, Urgellés J, Parés D (2012) Prospective analysis of clinician accuracy in the diagnosis of benign anorectal pathology: the value of clinical information. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 104:122–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones OM, Ramalingam T, Lindsey I, Cunningham C, George BD, Mortensen NJ (2005) Digital rectal examination of sphincter pressures in chronic anal fissure is unreliable. Dis Colon Rectum 48:349–352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jordán J, Roig JV, García-Armengol J, García-Granero E, Solana A, Lledó S (2010) Risk factors for recurrence and incontinence after anal fistula surgery. Colorectal Dis 12:254–260PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Karlbom U, Graf W, Nilsson S, Påhlman L (2004) The accuracy of clinical examination in the diagnosis of rectal intussusception. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1533–1538PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kashyap AS, Kohli DR, Raizon A, Olden KW (2013) A prospective study evaluating emotional disturbance in subjects undergoing defecating proctography. World J Gastroenterol 19:3990–3995PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kuehn HG, Gebbensleben O, Hilger Y, Rohde H (2009) Relationship between anal symptoms and anal findings. Int J Med Sci 6:77–84PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Laurell H, Hansson LE, Gunnarsson U (2006) Why do surgeons miss malignancies in patients with acute abdominal pain? Anticancer Res 26:3675–3678PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Longo WE (2003) The specialty of colon and rectal surgery: its impact on patient care and role in academic medicine. Yale J Biol Med 76:63–77PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Maconi G, Gridavilla D, Viganò C, Sciurti R, Asthana AK, Furfaro F, Re F, Ardizzone S, Ba G (2014) Perianal disease is associated with psychiatric co-morbidity in Crohn’s disease in remission. Int J Colorectal Dis 29:1285–1290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ratto C, Grillo E, Parello A, Costamagna G, Doglietto GB (2005) Endoanal ultrasound-guided surgery for anal fistula. Endoscopy 37:722–728PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Roos AM, Abdool Z, Thakar R, Sultan AH (2012) Predicting anal sphincter defects: the value of clinical examination and manometry. Int Urogynecol J 23:755–763PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sharma A, Sharp DM, Walker LG, Monson JR (2008) Stress and burnout among colorectal surgeons and colorectal nurse specialists working in the National Health Service. Colorectal Dis 10:397–406PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Siproudhis L, Ropert A, Vilotte J, Bretagne JF, Heresbach D, Raoul JL, Gosselin M (1993) How accurate is clinical examination in diagnosing and quantifying pelvirectal disorders? A prospective study in a group of 50 patients complaining of defecatory difficulties. Dis Colon Rectum 36:430–438PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sit M, Yilmaz EE, Canan F, Yildirim O, Cetin MM (2014a) Health-related quality of life in patients with anal fissure: effect of type D personality. Prz Gastroenterol 9:93–98PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Sit M, Yilmaz EE, Canan F, Yıldırım O, Cetin MM (2014b) The impact of type D personality on health-related quality of life in patients with symptomatic haemorrhoids. Prz Gastroenterol 9:242–248PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Sprangers MA, Taal BG, Aaronson NK, teVelde A (1995) Quality of life in colorectal cancer. Stoma vs. non-stoma patients. Dis Colon Rectum 38:361–369PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Springall RG, Todd IP (1988) General practitioner referral of patients with lower gastrointestinal symptoms. J R Soc Med 81:87–88PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Sygut A, Mik M, Trzcinski R, Dziki A (2010) How the location of the internal opening of anal fistulas affect the treatment results of primary transsphincteric fistulas. Langenbecks Arch Surg 395:1055–1059PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Talley NJ (2008) How to do and interpret a rectal examination in gastroenterology. Am J Gastroenterol 103:820–822PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tantiphlachiva K, Rao P, Attaluri A, Rao SS (2010) Digital rectal examination is a useful tool for identifying patients with dyssynergia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 8:955–960PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Toyonaga T, Tanaka Y, Song JF, Katori R, Sogawa N, Kanyama H, Hatakeyama T, Matsushima M, Suzuki S, Mibu R, Tanaka M (2008) Comparison of accuracy of physical examination and endoanal ultrasonography for preoperative assessment in patients with acute and chronic anal fistula. Tech Coloproctol 12:217–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zbar AP (2009) David Henry Goodsall: reassessment of the rule. Tech Coloproctol 13:185–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlo Ratto
    • 1
  • Francesco Litta
    • 1
  • Lorenza Donisi
    • 1
  • Angelo Parello
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgical Sciences, Proctology UnitCatholic UniversityRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations