Evaluation of 153 Asymptomatic Subjects Using the Anopress Portable Anal Manometry Device

Abstract

Background/AimsThe Anopress device is a new portable manometry system. The aim of this study is to formulate normative data using this new device by recording the anorectal function of asymptomatic subjects. Patient comfort was also assessed.MethodsAnorectal function was assessed in asymptomatic volunteers using the Anopress. All volunteers were examined in a standardized way in accordance with the study protocol. Normative values for the Anopress were obtained from the recorded data and patient comfort was assessed using a visual analogue scale.ResultsWe recruited 153 healthy volunteers. Eighty were female (23 parous; median age 39.5 [interquartile range {IQR}, 28.75–53.00]) and 73 were male (median age 40.5 [IQR, 29.00–52.25]). For the female cohort, the following normal range (2.5–97.5 percentile) values were recorded across the whole anal canal: resting pressure 40.0–103.0 mmHg; squeeze increment 35.0–140.6 mmHg; endurance 1.3–9.0 seconds; involuntary squeeze 41.1–120.8 mmHg; and strain pressure 22.1–77.9 mmHg. Similarly, the following male normal range (2.5–97.5 percentile) values were recorded across the whole anal canal: resting pressure 38.3–99.6 mmHg; squeeze increment 42.5–154.8 mmHg; involuntary squeeze 40.0–123.6 mmHg; endurance 2.0–10.0 seconds; and strain pressure 11.0–72.1 mmHg. The median visual analogue scale scores for discomfort during the measurement was 0.0 (IQR, 0.00–0.00).ConclusionsNormative values for the Anopress device have been calculated by this study. The Anopress appears to be a safe and well tolerated way of measuring pressures from the entire anal canal. Further comparisons with other standard and commonly used manometry tests are, however, required to verify its reliability.

The London Classification: Improving Characterization and Classification of Anorectal Function with Anorectal Manometry

“…A further recent innovation is the availability of 'bedside' manometry through portable equipment (e.g. mcompass: Medspira; Minnesota, USA, to which an air-charged catheter is attached [14]; Anopress: THD Worldwide, to which a single-channel sleeve catheter is linked [15]; or a wireless catheter (Ningbo Maida Medical Device Inc.: Ningbo, China [16]). At present, 'bedside' HR-ARM is only feasible using the Ningbo Maida Medical system.…”

Systematic evaluation of cough‐anorectal pressure responses in health and in fecal incontinence: A high‐resolution anorectal manometry study

“…This is despite consideration of parity being reported as essential for correct interpretation of manometric results, 18,33 though findings vary according to equipment used. 34,35 Overall, 43.9% (25/57) of incontinent patients showed no evidence of impaired sphincter function based on traditional measures alone. However, it may be that broad measures of rest and squeeze are too "blunt" as tools to identify sphincter dysfunction in all patients, and that including analysis of the cough maneuver may enable identification of a, perhaps more subtle, functional deficit.…”

“…Voluntary squeeze increment discriminated between continent and incontinent subjects, but failed to show a difference between nulliparous and parous healthy volunteers. This is despite consideration of parity being reported as essential for correct interpretation of manometric results, 18,33 though findings vary according to equipment used 34,35 . Overall, 43.9% (25/57) of incontinent patients showed no evidence of impaired sphincter function based on traditional measures alone.…”

“…This is despite consideration of parity being reported as essential for correct interpretation of manometric results, 18,33 though findings vary according to equipment used. 34,35 Overall, 43.9%…”