BACKGROUND: To assess the usefulness of rectal diameter measurement on ultrasonography as a diagnostic tool for fecal retention in children. METHODS: One hundred children (median age, 5.0 years), consisting of 80 with functional constipation and 20 without constipation, participated in the study. All patients underwent physical examination that included digital rectal examination. Forty-five children underwent ultrasonography in three differential planes: transection above the symphysis; under the ischial spine; and at the bladder neck. The measurement of the rectal diameter at the transection above the symphysis could most easily detect fecal retention and had the closest correlations with retention among the three planes. RESULTS: Rectal diameter was wider at all measuring points (35.2 vs 20.9 mm above the symphysis, P < 0.0001; 35.7 vs 24.0 mm under the ischial spine, P < 0.0001; and 19.4 vs 8.7 mm at the bladder neck, P < 0.0001) in children with fecal retention than in those with no fecal retention. With regard to presence of constipation, children with fecal retention had a wider rectal diameter above the symphysis than those with no fecal retention (children with functional constipation, 35.3 vs 20.0 mm, P < 0.0001; children without constipation: 32.6 vs 14.6 mm, P = 0.0026). The cut-off for the rectal diameter measured above the symphysis to identify fecal retention was 27 mm, with high sensitivity and specificity (95.5% and 94.1%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound rectal diameter measurement can be used to detect fecal retention in children.
BACKGROUND: To assess the usefulness of rectal diameter measurement on ultrasonography as a diagnostic tool for fecal retention in children. METHODS: One hundred children (median age, 5.0 years), consisting of 80 with functional constipation and 20 without constipation, participated in the study. All patients underwent physical examination that included digital rectal examination. Forty-five children underwent ultrasonography in three differential planes: transection above the symphysis; under the ischial spine; and at the bladder neck. The measurement of the rectal diameter at the transection above the symphysis could most easily detect fecal retention and had the closest correlations with retention among the three planes. RESULTS: Rectal diameter was wider at all measuring points (35.2 vs 20.9 mm above the symphysis, P < 0.0001; 35.7 vs 24.0 mm under the ischial spine, P < 0.0001; and 19.4 vs 8.7 mm at the bladder neck, P < 0.0001) in children with fecal retention than in those with no fecal retention. With regard to presence of constipation, children with fecal retention had a wider rectal diameter above the symphysis than those with no fecal retention (children with functional constipation, 35.3 vs 20.0 mm, P < 0.0001; children without constipation: 32.6 vs 14.6 mm, P = 0.0026). The cut-off for the rectal diameter measured above the symphysis to identify fecal retention was 27 mm, with high sensitivity and specificity (95.5% and 94.1%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound rectal diameter measurement can be used to detect fecal retention in children.
Authors: Sasa Milivojevic; Aleksandra Zelenovic; Jelena Milin-Lazovic; Ognjen Radojicic; Darko Laketic; Ivana Dasic; Natasa Milic; Zoran Radojicic Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2022-09-29 Impact factor: 3.569