Literature DB >> 17096089

Anal inspection and digital rectal examination compared to anorectal physiology tests and endoanal ultrasonography in evaluating fecal incontinence.

Annette C Dobben1, Maaike P Terra, Marije Deutekom, Michael F Gerhards, A Bart Bijnen, Richelle J F Felt-Bersma, Lucas W M Janssen, Patrick M M Bossuyt, Jaap Stoker.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anal inspection and digital rectal examination are routinely performed in fecal incontinent patients but it is not clear to what extent they contribute to the diagnostic work-up. We examined if and how findings of anal inspection and rectal examination are associated with anorectal function tests and endoanal ultrasonography.
METHODS: A cohort of fecal incontinent patients (n=312, 90% females; mean age 59) prospectively underwent anal inspection and rectal examination. Findings were compared with results of anorectal function tests and endoanal ultrasonography.
RESULTS: Absent, decreased and normal resting and squeeze pressures at rectal examination correlated to some extent with mean (+/-SD) manometric findings: mean resting pressure 41.3 (+/-20), 43.8 (+/-20) and 61.6 (+/-23) Hg (p<0.001); incremental squeeze pressure 20.6 (+/-20), 38.4 (+/-31) and 62.4 (+/-34) Hg (p<0.001). External anal sphincter defects at rectal examination were confirmed with endoanal ultrasonography for defects <90 degrees in 36% (37/103); for defects between 90-150 degrees in 61% (20/33); for defects between 150-270 degrees in 100% (6/6). Patients with anal scar tissue at anal inspection had lower incremental squeeze pressures (p=0.04); patients with a gaping anus had lower resting pressures (p=0.013) at anorectal manometry. All other findings were not related to any anorectal function test or endoanal ultrasonography.
CONCLUSIONS: Anal inspection and digital rectal examination can give accurate information about internal and external anal sphincter function but are inaccurate for determining external anal sphincter defects <90 degrees. Therefore, a sufficient diagnostic work-up should comprise at least rectal examination, anal inspection and endoanal ultrasonography.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17096089     DOI: 10.1007/s00384-006-0217-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 0179-1958            Impact factor:   2.796


  40 in total

Review 1.  AGA technical review on anorectal testing techniques.

Authors:  N E Diamant; M A Kamm; A Wald; W E Whitehead
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 2.  Outcome measures for fecal incontinence: anorectal structure and function.

Authors:  Adil E Bharucha
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Diagnostic work-up for faecal incontinence in daily clinical practice in the Netherlands.

Authors:  A C Dobben; M P Terra; M Deutekom; P M M Bossuyt; R J F Felt-Bersma; J Stoker
Journal:  Neth J Med       Date:  2005 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.422

4.  A prospective evaluation of the value of anorectal physiology in the management of fecal incontinence.

Authors:  H Liberman; J Faria; C A Ternent; G J Blatchford; M A Christensen; A G Thorson
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.585

Review 5.  Manometric evaluation of defecation disorders: Part II. Fecal incontinence.

Authors:  S S Rao
Journal:  Gastroenterologist       Date:  1997-06

Review 6.  Etiology and management of fecal incontinence.

Authors:  J M Jorge; S D Wexner
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Are special investigations of value in the management of patients with fecal incontinence?

Authors:  J P Keating; P J Stewart; A A Eyers; D Warner; E L Bokey
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 4.585

Review 8.  The prevalence of fecal incontinence in community-dwelling adults: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Alexandra K Macmillan; Arend E H Merrie; Roger J Marshall; Bryan R Parry
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.585

9.  Anorectal function investigations in incontinent and continent patients. Differences and discriminatory value.

Authors:  R J Felt-Bersma; E C Klinkenberg-Knol; S G Meuwissen
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 4.585

10.  Liquid stool incontinence with severe urgency: anorectal function and effective biofeedback treatment.

Authors:  G Chiarioni; C Scattolini; F Bonfante; I Vantini
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 23.059

View more
  20 in total

1.  Epidemiologic Trends and Diagnostic Evaluation of Fecal Incontinence.

Authors:  Amol Sharma; Satish S C Rao
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2020-06

2.  Predicting anal sphincter defects: the value of clinical examination and manometry.

Authors:  Anne-Marie Roos; Zeelha Abdool; Ranee Thakar; Abdul H Sultan
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-18       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 3.  Investigating and treating fecal incontinence: when and how.

Authors:  Adriana Lazarescu; Geoffrey K Turnbull; Stephen Vanner
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.522

4.  Sacral nerve stimulation induces changes in the pelvic floor and rectum that improve continence and quality of life.

Authors:  Susanne Dorothea Otto; Stefanie Burmeister; Heinz J Buhr; Anton Kroesen
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female anorectal dysfunction.

Authors:  Abdul H Sultan; Ash Monga; Joseph Lee; Anton Emmanuel; Christine Norton; Giulio Santoro; Tracy Hull; Bary Berghmans; Stuart Brody; Bernard T Haylen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-10-24       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  The diagnostic value of a digital rectal examination compared with high-resolution anorectal manometry in patients with chronic constipation and fecal incontinence.

Authors:  Jae Seung Soh; Hyo Jeong Lee; Kee Wook Jung; In Ja Yoon; Hyun Sook Koo; So Young Seo; Seohyun Lee; Jung Ho Bae; Ho-Su Lee; Sang Hyoung Park; Dong-Hoon Yang; Kyung-Jo Kim; Byong Duk Ye; Jeong-Sik Byeon; Suk-Kyun Yang; Jin-Ho Kim; Seung-Jae Myung
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-06-02       Impact factor: 10.864

7.  Accuracy of the digital anal examination in women with fecal incontinence.

Authors:  Peter C Jeppson; Marie Fidela R Paraiso; J Eric Jelovsek; Matthew D Barber
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-05       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  Normative values in anorectal manometry using microtip technology: a cohort study in 172 subjects.

Authors:  Jochen Schuld; Otto Kollmar; Christian Schlüter; Martin K Schilling; Sven Richter
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Discriminative value of anorectal manometry in clinical practice.

Authors:  Naeem Raza; Klaus Bielefeldt
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2008-12-18       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 10.  Management of patients with faecal incontinence.

Authors:  Jakob Duelund-Jakobsen; Jonas Worsoe; Lilli Lundby; Peter Christensen; Klaus Krogh
Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.409

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.