BACKGROUND: To determine whether patient position or sphincter contraction influences sphincter thickness or defect assessment. METHODS: Anal endosonography was performed on 35 consecutive patients (30 women, five men). Twenty-five were scanned in the left lateral and prone positions, and the internal sphincter thickness was measured. In 10 patients, the internal sphincter, longitudinal muscle, external sphincter, and length of any defect were measured at rest and during anal squeeze. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in internal sphincter thickness measured in the prone and left lateral positions (95% limits of agreement, -0.12 to 0.06). The thickness of the internal sphincter, longitudinal muscle, and external sphincter at rest did not change significantly during straining (95% limits of agreement, -0.44 to 0.3, -0.28 to 0.24, and 0.33 to 0.71, respectively). The squeeze maneuver did not influence defect appearance or length (95% limits of agreement, -2.845 to 2. 379). Greater symmetry of the anterior part of the external sphincter and improved visualization of perineum was achieved in the prone position. CONCLUSION: Examination in the prone position is preferred. Squeeze maneuvers are of no diagnostic benefit.
BACKGROUND: To determine whether patient position or sphincter contraction influences sphincter thickness or defect assessment. METHODS: Anal endosonography was performed on 35 consecutive patients (30 women, five men). Twenty-five were scanned in the left lateral and prone positions, and the internal sphincter thickness was measured. In 10 patients, the internal sphincter, longitudinal muscle, external sphincter, and length of any defect were measured at rest and during anal squeeze. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in internal sphincter thickness measured in the prone and left lateral positions (95% limits of agreement, -0.12 to 0.06). The thickness of the internal sphincter, longitudinal muscle, and external sphincter at rest did not change significantly during straining (95% limits of agreement, -0.44 to 0.3, -0.28 to 0.24, and 0.33 to 0.71, respectively). The squeeze maneuver did not influence defect appearance or length (95% limits of agreement, -2.845 to 2. 379). Greater symmetry of the anterior part of the external sphincter and improved visualization of perineum was achieved in the prone position. CONCLUSION: Examination in the prone position is preferred. Squeeze maneuvers are of no diagnostic benefit.
Authors: A Reginelli; Y Mandato; C Cavaliere; N L Pizza; A Russo; S Cappabianca; L Brunese; A Rotondo; R Grassi Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2012-01-07 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: D N Samarasekera; Y Wright; R H Lowndes; K P Stanley; P Preston; C T M Speakman Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2008-08-05 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Paolo Boccasanta; Marco Venturi; Giovanni Salamina; Bruno Mario Cesana; Francesco Bernasconi; Giancarlo Roviaro Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2004-03-13 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Andrea Frudinger; Rainer Marksteiner; Johann Pfeifer; Eva Margreiter; Johannes Paede; Marco Thurner Journal: Stem Cell Res Ther Date: 2018-09-13 Impact factor: 6.832