The importance of a high rectal pressure on strain in constipated patients: implications for biofeedback therapy

Introduced approximately 10 years ago, high-resolution manometry catheters have fostered interest in anorectal manometry. This review, which accompanies 2 articles in this issue of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, reviews the methods, clinical indications, utility, and pitfalls of anorectal manometry and revisits the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Medical Position Statement on Anorectal Testing Techniques, which was last published in 1999. High-resolution manometry provides a refined assessment of the anorectal pressure profile, obviates the need for station pull-through maneuvers, and minimizes movement artifacts. In selected cases, this refined assessment may be useful for identifying structural abnormalities or anal weakness. However, many manometry patterns that were previously regarded as abnormal are also observed in a majority of healthy patients, which substantially limits the utility of manometry for identifying defecatory disorders. It is our impression that most conclusions of the AGA medical position statement from 1999 remain valid today. High-resolution techniques have not substantially affected the number of publications on or management of anorectal disorders. The ongoing efforts of an international working group to standardize techniques for anorectal manometry are welcome. Although high-resolution manometry is more than an expensive hobby, improvements in catheter design and further research to rigorously define and evaluate these techniques are necessary to determine if they are worth every penny.

Section: Utility Of Anorectal Manometry In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

High‐resolution anorectal manometry: An expensive hobby or worth every penny?

Basilisco

Bharucha

2017

“…Hence, arguably a balloon expulsion test is less useful than defecography in this setting. Among patients with defecatory disorders, excessive straining during defecation is associated with a higher rectal pressure, 32 which may, in turn, predispose the patient to a greater rectal‐vaginal pressure gradient, 33 resulting in a rectocele (Figure 1).…”

Section: Diagnosis and Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rectocele: Incidental or important? Observe or operate? Contemporary diagnosis and management in the multidisciplinary era

Bharucha

Knowles

2022

Background More common in older women than younger women, rectoceles may be secondary to pelvic floor weakness and/or pelvic floor dysfunction with impaired rectal evacuation. Rectoceles may be small (<2 cm), medium (2–4 cm), or large (>4 cm). Arguably, large rectoceles are more likely to be associated with symptoms (e.g., difficult defecation). It can be challenging to ascertain the extent to which a rectocele is secondary to pelvic floor dysfunction and/or whether a rectocele, rather than associated pelvic floor dysfunction, is responsible for symptoms. Surgical repair should be considered when initial treatment measures (e.g., bowel modifying agents and pelvic floor biofeedback therapy) are unsuccessful. Purpose We summarize the clinical features, diagnosis, and management of rectoceles, with an emphasis on outcomes after surgical repair. This review accompanies a retrospective analysis of outcomes after multidisciplinary, transvaginal rectocele repair procedures undertaken by three colorectal surgeons in 215 patients at a large teaching hospital in the UK. A majority of patients had a large rectocele. Some patients also underwent an anterior levatorplasty and/or an enterocele repair. All patients were jointly assessed, and some patients underwent surgery by colorectal and urogynecologic surgeons. In this cohort, the perioperative data, efficacy, and harms outcomes are comparable with historical data predominantly derived from retrospective series in which patients had a good outcome (67%–78%), symptoms of difficult defecation improved (30%–50%), and patients had a recurrent rectocele 2 years after surgery (17%). Building on these data, prospective studies that rigorously evaluate outcomes after surgical repair are necessary.

“…The rationale for this was the increasing recognition that Rome IV does not identify all patients with a defecatory disorder such as those with "hyperdefecation." 26…”

Section: Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experiencing multiple concurrent functional gastrointestinal disorders is associated with greater symptom severity and worse quality of life in chronic constipation and defecation disorders

Kaplan

Mazor

Prott

et al. 2022

Background Recent community‐based studies have demonstrated that experiencing multiple concurrent functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) is associated with increased somatization, worse quality of life (QoL), and greater health care utilization. However, the presence of multiple overlapping FGIDs is unstudied specifically in chronic constipation and functional defecation disorders (FDD). We investigated the prevalence and impact of additional nonconstipation FGIDs on constipation severity, anorectal physiology, anxiety and depression, and QoL, in patients with chronic constipation and FDD. Methods One‐hundred and forty‐six consecutive patients with functional constipation or irritable bowel syndrome (IBS‐C/IBS‐M) presenting to a tertiary referral Neurogastroenterology Clinic were studied. In addition, 90/146 (62%) qualified for FDD due to abnormal defecatory physiology. Patients underwent comprehensive baseline assessment comprising anorectal physiology, Bristol Stool Chart, Rome questionnaire, Knowles‐Eccersley‐Scott‐Symptom (KESS) constipation score, Hospital Anxiety, and Depression Scale, and modified 36‐Item Short Form Health Survey (SF‐36) for QoL. Additional FGIDs were diagnosed using Rome III criteria. Key Results Additional nonconstipation FGIDs occurred in 85% of patients, with a mean of 2.1 (SD 1.6) additional FGIDs. Patients with four or more additional FGIDs experienced greater constipation severity compared to those with no additional FGIDs (p = 0.004). Comorbid FGIDs were associated with worse SF‐36 scores for physical functioning (p < 0.001), role‐physical (p = 0.005), bodily pain (p < 0.001), vitality (p = 0.008), social functioning (p = 0.004), and mental health index (p = 0.031). Conclusions and Inferences Functional gastrointestinal disorders comorbidity is highly prevalent in chronic constipation and defecatory disorders, and this is associated with greater symptom severity and worse QoL. Multimodal treatments targeting comorbid FGIDs may lead to superior outcomes.