BACKGROUND: Fecal incontinence is a common problem after reconstructive surgery for anorectal malformations. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of clinical scores and anorectal manometry in patients, who have been operated on for anorectal malformations. METHODS: In total, 18 patients who underwent surgery for anorectal malformation between 1999 and 2004 were investigated for anal continence. For the assessment of the patients' continence, Kelly's clinical scoring, Kiesewetter-Chang scoring, and anorectal manometry were used. RESULTS: In the intermediate level anorectal malformations, average anal resting pressure was found as 58.16 +/- 8.14 cmH(2)O and in high level anorectal malformations was found as 40.16 +/- 17.4 cmH(2)O. In the continence score, good according to Kelly and Kiesewetter-Chang scoring systems was an average anal resting pressure value of 57.92 +/- 8.57 cmH(2)O and in fair or bad was found as 32 +/- 12.83 cmH(2)O. There were significant differences between the scoring systems anorectal malformation level, and average anal resting pressure values (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Anorectal manometric evaluation of the patients in postoperative period with anorectal malformation can give more realistic information about the patient continence status in anorectal malformations.
BACKGROUND: Fecal incontinence is a common problem after reconstructive surgery for anorectal malformations. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of clinical scores and anorectal manometry in patients, who have been operated on for anorectal malformations. METHODS: In total, 18 patients who underwent surgery for anorectal malformation between 1999 and 2004 were investigated for anal continence. For the assessment of the patients' continence, Kelly's clinical scoring, Kiesewetter-Chang scoring, and anorectal manometry were used. RESULTS: In the intermediate level anorectal malformations, average anal resting pressure was found as 58.16 +/- 8.14 cmH(2)O and in high level anorectal malformations was found as 40.16 +/- 17.4 cmH(2)O. In the continence score, good according to Kelly and Kiesewetter-Chang scoring systems was an average anal resting pressure value of 57.92 +/- 8.57 cmH(2)O and in fair or bad was found as 32 +/- 12.83 cmH(2)O. There were significant differences between the scoring systems anorectal malformation level, and average anal resting pressure values (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Anorectal manometric evaluation of the patients in postoperative period with anorectal malformation can give more realistic information about the patient continence status in anorectal malformations.