Ugo Grossi1, Emma V Carrington1, Adil E Bharucha2, Emma J Horrocks1, S Mark Scott1, Charles H Knowles1. 1. National Centre for Bowel Research and Surgical Innovation and GI Physiology Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. 2. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry (AM), which is necessary to diagnose functional defecatory disorders (FDD), is unknown. Using blinded analysis and standardised reporting of diagnostic accuracy, we evaluated whether AM could discriminate between asymptomatic controls and patients with functional constipation (FC). DESIGN: Derived line plots of anorectal pressure profiles during simulated defecation were independently analysed in random order by three expert observers blinded to health status in 85 women with FC and 85 age-matched asymptomatic healthy volunteers (HV). Using accepted criteria, these pressure profiles were characterised as normal (ie, increased rectal pressure coordinated with anal relaxation) or types I-IV dyssynergia. Interobserver agreement and diagnostic accuracy were determined. RESULTS: Blinded consensus-based assessment disclosed a normal pattern in 16/170 (9%) of all participants and only 11/85 (13%) HV. The combined frequency of dyssynergic patterns (I-IV) was very similar in FC (80/85 (94%)) and HV (74/85 (87%)). Type I dyssynergia ('paradoxical' contraction) was less prevalent in FC (17/85 (20%) than in HV (31/85 (36.5%), p=0.03). After statistical correction, only type IV dyssynergia was moderately useful for discriminating between FC (39/85 (46%)) and HV (17/85 (20%)) (p=0.001, positive predictive value=70.0%, positive likelihood ratio=2.3). Interobserver agreement was substantial or moderate for identifying a normal pattern, dyssynergia types I and IV, and FDD, and fair for types II and III. CONCLUSIONS: While the interpretation of AM patterns is reproducible, nearly 90% of HV have a pattern that is currently regarded as 'abnormal' by AM. Hence, AM is of limited utility for distinguishing between FC and HV. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
OBJECTIVE: The diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry (AM), which is necessary to diagnose functional defecatory disorders (FDD), is unknown. Using blinded analysis and standardised reporting of diagnostic accuracy, we evaluated whether AM could discriminate between asymptomatic controls and patients with functional constipation (FC). DESIGN: Derived line plots of anorectal pressure profiles during simulated defecation were independently analysed in random order by three expert observers blinded to health status in 85 women with FC and 85 age-matched asymptomatic healthy volunteers (HV). Using accepted criteria, these pressure profiles were characterised as normal (ie, increased rectal pressure coordinated with anal relaxation) or types I-IV dyssynergia. Interobserver agreement and diagnostic accuracy were determined. RESULTS: Blinded consensus-based assessment disclosed a normal pattern in 16/170 (9%) of all participants and only 11/85 (13%) HV. The combined frequency of dyssynergic patterns (I-IV) was very similar in FC (80/85 (94%)) and HV (74/85 (87%)). Type I dyssynergia ('paradoxical' contraction) was less prevalent in FC (17/85 (20%) than in HV (31/85 (36.5%), p=0.03). After statistical correction, only type IV dyssynergia was moderately useful for discriminating between FC (39/85 (46%)) and HV (17/85 (20%)) (p=0.001, positive predictive value=70.0%, positive likelihood ratio=2.3). Interobserver agreement was substantial or moderate for identifying a normal pattern, dyssynergia types I and IV, and FDD, and fair for types II and III. CONCLUSIONS: While the interpretation of AM patterns is reproducible, nearly 90% of HV have a pattern that is currently regarded as 'abnormal' by AM. Hence, AM is of limited utility for distinguishing between FC and HV. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Authors: Satish S C Rao; Jessica Valestin; C Kice Brown; Bridget Zimmerman; Konrad Schulze Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2010-02-23 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: S D Mohammed; P J Lunniss; N Zarate; A D Farmer; R Grahame; Q Aziz; S M Scott Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2010-07-05 Impact factor: 3.598
Authors: Adil E Bharucha; Andrew J Croak; John B Gebhart; Lawrence J Berglund; Barbara M Seide; Alan R Zinsmeister; Kai-Nan An Journal: Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol Date: 2006-02-02 Impact factor: 4.052
Authors: Mayank Sharma; Anjani Muthyala; Kelly Feuerhak; Susrutha Puthanmadhom Narayanan; Kent R Bailey; Adil E Bharucha Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 3.598
Authors: Satish Sc Rao; Adil E Bharucha; Giuseppe Chiarioni; Richelle Felt-Bersma; Charles Knowles; Allison Malcolm; Arnold Wald Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2016-03-25 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: J Noelting; J E Eaton; R S Choung; A R Zinsmeister; G R Locke; A E Bharucha Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 3.598