Referral for anorectal function evaluation is indicated in 65% and beneficial in 92% of patients

Abstract

AIM:To determine the indicated referrals to a tertiary centre for patients with anorectal symptoms, the effect of the advised treatment and the discomfort of the tests. METHODS:In a retrospective study, patients referred for anorectal function evaluation (AFE) between May 2004 and October 2006 were sent a questionnaire, as were the doctors who referred them. AFE consisted of anal manometry, rectal compliance measurement and anal endosonography. An indicated referral was defined as needing AFE to establish a diagnosis with clinical consequence (fecal incontinence without diarrhea, 3 rd degree anal sphincter rupture, congenital anorectal disorder, inflammatory bowel disease with anorectal complaints and preoperative in patients for re-anastomosis or enterostoma, anal fissure, fistula or constipation). Anal ultrasound is always indicated in patients with fistula, anal manometry and rectal compliance when impaired continence reserve is suspected. The therapeutic effect was noted as improvement, no improvement but reassurance, and deterioration. RESULTS:From the 216 patients referred, 167 (78%) returned the questionnaire. The referrals were indicated in 65%. Of these, 80% followed the proposed advice. Improvement was achieved in 35% and a reassurance in 57% of the patients, no difference existed between patient groups. On a VAS scale (1 to 10) symptoms improved from 4.0 to 7.2. Most patients reported no or little discomfort with AFE. CONCLUSION:Referral for AFE was indicated in 65%. Beneficial effect was seen in 92%: 35% improved and 57% was reassured. Advice was followed in 80%. Better instruction about indication for AFE referral is warranted.

Duration taken for the anal sphincter pressures to stabilize prior to anorectal manometry

“…In some patients, anorectal manometry can cause pain and discomfort [ 15 ]. Evidence from patients who underwent colonoscopy indicates that patients who perceive less pain or discomfort had a higher rate of returning for a repeat assessment [ 16 ], suggesting better compliance.…”