Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Background Fecal incontinence commonly occurs in patients with ulcerative colitis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. There is a paucity of manometric data in pouch patients. We aimed to better define manometric parameters in pouch patients with fecal incontinence. Methods We compared clinical and manometric variables in ulcerative colitis patients with pouch and fecal incontinence to ulcerative colitis patients with pouch without fecal incontinence and to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Manometric data for the three cohorts were compared to established normative data. An independent samples t-test was performed for continuous variables; chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of incontinence in pouch patients (p<0.05). Results Among 26 pouch patients with fecal incontinence (73% female), 26 pouch patients without fecal incontinence (35% female), and 84 patients with fecal incontinence without ulcerative colitis (68% female), there were no differences in anorectal pressures between patients with fecal incontinence. Lower pressures were observed in pouch patients with fecal incontinence compared to those without fecal incontinence. Resting pressure was similar between pouch patients with fecal incontinence and healthy controls (60.9±36.1mmHg vs. 66.9±3.2mmHg, p=0.40). Female sex (p=0.019) and defecatory disorders (p=0.033) each independently predicted fecal incontinence in pouch patients. Conclusions Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have lower anorectal pressures compared to pouch patients without incontinence, though have similar pressures to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have similar resting pressures as healthy controls. Distinct manometric normative values for pouch patients are needed.
Background Fecal incontinence commonly occurs in patients with ulcerative colitis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. There is a paucity of manometric data in pouch patients. We aimed to better define manometric parameters in pouch patients with fecal incontinence. Methods We compared clinical and manometric variables in ulcerative colitis patients with pouch and fecal incontinence to ulcerative colitis patients with pouch without fecal incontinence and to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Manometric data for the three cohorts were compared to established normative data. An independent samples t-test was performed for continuous variables; chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of incontinence in pouch patients (p<0.05). Results Among 26 pouch patients with fecal incontinence (73% female), 26 pouch patients without fecal incontinence (35% female), and 84 patients with fecal incontinence without ulcerative colitis (68% female), there were no differences in anorectal pressures between patients with fecal incontinence. Lower pressures were observed in pouch patients with fecal incontinence compared to those without fecal incontinence. Resting pressure was similar between pouch patients with fecal incontinence and healthy controls (60.9±36.1mmHg vs. 66.9±3.2mmHg, p=0.40). Female sex (p=0.019) and defecatory disorders (p=0.033) each independently predicted fecal incontinence in pouch patients. Conclusions Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have lower anorectal pressures compared to pouch patients without incontinence, though have similar pressures to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have similar resting pressures as healthy controls. Distinct manometric normative values for pouch patients are needed.
Background Total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) for medically refractory ulcerative colitis or dysplasia may be associated with structural and inflammatory complications. However, even in their absence, defecatory symptoms secondary to dyssynergic defecation or fecal incontinence may occur. Although anorectal manometry is well established as the diagnostic test of choice for defecatory symptoms, its utility in the assessment of patients with IPAA is less established. In this systematic review, we critically evaluate the existing evidence for anopouch manometry (APM). Methods A total of 393 studies were identified, of which 6 studies met all inclusion criteria. Studies were not pooled given different modalities of testing with varying outcome measures. Results Overall, less than 10% of symptomatic patients post-IPAA were referred to APM. The prevalence of dyssynergic defecation as defined by the Rome IV criteria in symptomatic patients with IPAA ranged from 47.0% to 100%. Fecal incontinence in patients with IPAA was characterized by decreased mean and maximal resting anal pressure on APM, as well as pouch hyposensitivity. The recto-anal inhibitory reflex was absent in most patients with and without incontinence. Conclusion Manometry alone is an imperfect assessment of pouch function in patients with defecatory symptoms, and confirmatory testing may need to be performed with dynamic imaging.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.