Anorectal motility in systemic scleroderma

We prospectively compared esophageal and rectal motility data from 7 patients with progressive systemic sclerosis (4 females, 3 males) to esophageal recordings in 22 and anorectal recordings in 9 healthy controls. All patients with sclerosis exhibited motility disturbances in the lower esophageal sphincter (LES): LES resting pressure, LES relaxation amplitude and duration, and the number of incomplete LES relaxations were significantly different compared to the controls. All patients had alterations of anorectal motility: resting pressure, maximal squeeze pressure, and sphincter relaxation amplitude following balloon distension of the rectum were significantly decreased as compared to the control subjects. We conclude that esophageal and anorectal manometry are comparable in their sensitivity to differentiate between patients with systemic sclerosis and normal subjects.     

Regional Esophageal Dysfunction in Scleroderma and Achalasia using Multichannel Intraluminal Impedance and Manometry

Background Achalasia and scleroderma are esophageal motility abnormalities characterized by severely impaired bolus transit. Combined multichannel intraluminal impedance and manometry (MII-EM) enables the simultaneous measurement of intraesophageal pressures and bolus transit at various levels within the esophagus. Aim The aim of the study was to evaluate and characterize regional pressure and transit profile differences in scleroderma and achalasia patients. Methods A retrospective analysis was carried out of MII-EM studies of patients with scleroderma (15), achalasia (20), and poorly relaxing lower esophageal sphincter (LES) with normal esophageal body function (20) as a control group. Bolus presence and segmental transit were evaluated by MII. Results In patients with achalasia, bolus transit was impaired across all four sites compared with scleroderma (P < 0.0125) even though distal esophageal pressures were higher (P < 0.05) in patients with achalasia. Pressures in patients with achalasia were similar across all four sites (ANOVA; saline, P = 0.373; viscous, P = 0.615). Bolus clearance rates and contraction amplitudes in patients with scleroderma decreased from proximal to distal. In the control group, bolus clearance was complete during ≥83% of all swallows and esophageal pressure amplitudes increased distally. Conclusion While the overall bolus transit is impaired in both patients with achalasia and scleroderma regional pressure and bolus transit differences exist. Bolus transit abnormalities result from abnormal esophageal body contraction and not abnormal LES relaxation.     

Anal Manometry: A Comparison of Techniques

Purpose Methods of anal manometry vary between centers, resulting in potential difficulties in interpretation of results. This study compared several accepted manometric techniques in healthy control subjects and in patients with fecal incontinence. Methods Eleven patients with fecal incontinence (M:F = 3:8; mean age = 67 years) and ten healthy control subjects (M:F = 3:7; mean age = 64 years) underwent anal manometry using five different methods: 1) water-perfused side hole; 2) water-perfused end hole; 3) microtransducer; 4) microballoon; 5) portable Peritron. Using a station pull-through technique, anal pressures (resting, squeeze, and cough pressures) were recorded at 1-cm intervals from rectum to anal verge, as well as radial pressures in four quadrants for Methods 1 and 2. Results Water perfusion side hole recorded slightly higher maximal resting pressures; however, there were no significant differences between any of the methods. In healthy control subjects, distal maximal squeeze pressures were significantly higher (P < 0.05) than proximally as measured by microtransducer. There were slight (nonsignificant) variations in radial pressures with water perfusion and microtransducer. Peritron values for maximum resting pressure and maximum squeeze pressure were lower than those recorded by water perfusion side hole by a factor of 0.8. Conclusions There is no significant variation in anal pressure recordings using standard manometry techniques. Variations in radial pressures are slight and not significant in clinical studies. Results obtained with portable nonperfusion systems must be interpreted appropriately. Poster presentation at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Boston, Massachusetts, June 24 to 29, 2000.     

High-resolution manometry in the evaluation of anorectal disorders: a simultaneous comparison with water-perfused manometry

INTRODUCTION: High-resolution manometry (HRM) combined with novel interpretive software allows for the interpolation of manometric recordings into highly detailed topographical plots of intraluminal pressure events relative to time and location. To date, HRM has been used primarily in the study of esophageal disorders and has been shown to provide greater physiologic resolving power compared with standard manometric techniques. This preliminary feasibility study is the first report evaluating HRM and simultaneously performed water-perfused manometry (WPM) in patients referred for anorectal manometry (ARM). METHODS: Consecutive patients referred for ARM underwent simultaneous WPM and HRM. WPM was performed using a 6-cm sleeve assembly with side-holes spaced at 3-cm intervals. HRM was performed using the ManoScan system (Sierra Scientific Instruments, Los Angeles, CA) consisting of a 36-channel catheter with sensors spaced at 1-cm intervals. Space-time pressure data were displayed in topographic form using ManoView analysis software that is part of the ManoScan system. Measurements of anal sphincter pressure at rest, during voluntary contraction, and during 40-mL rectal balloon distension were compared. RESULTS: A total of 29 patients were studied. Indications for manometry were constipation (19), incontinence (7), and fecal soilage (3). Simultaneously recorded resting, squeeze, and relaxation pressures showed the two methods to be significantly correlated although anal sphincter pressures recorded by HRM tended to be higher than those recorded with WPM. HRM provided greater resolution of the intraluminal pressure environment of the anorectum. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary observations demonstrate that anorectal HRM highly correlated with WPM measurements and provided greater anatomic detail.     

Anorectal pressure gradient and rectal compliance in fecal incontinence

To study whether anorectal pressure gradients discriminated better than standard anal manometry between patients with fecal incontinence and subjects with normal anal function, anorectal pressure gradients were measured during rectal compliance measurements in 36 patients with fecal incontinence and in 22 control subjects. Anal and rectal pressures were measured simultaneously during the rectal compliance measurements. With standard anal manometry, 75% of patients with fecal incontinence had maximal resting pressure within the normal range, and 39% had maximum squeeze pressure within the normal range. Anorectal pressure gradients did not discriminate better between fecal incontinence and normal anal function, since, depending on the parameters used, 61%–100% of the incontinent patients had anorectal pressure gradients within the normal range. Patients with fecal incontinence had lower rectal volumes than controls at constant defecation urge (median 138 ml and 181 ml, P<0.05) and at maximal tolerable volume (median 185 ml and 217 ml, P<0.05). We conclude that measurements of anorectal pressure gradients offer no advantage over standard anal manometry when comparing patients with fecal incontinence to controls. Patients with fecal incontinence have a lower rectal volume tolerability than control subjects with normal anal function. Accepted: 5 June 1998     

Infusion manometry and detection of sphincteric function of crural diaphragm

The principles of infusion manometry in the measurement of lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure were laid down in the mid-1960s by L.D. Harris and his coworkers. Dodds and his colleagues were largely responsible for the improvements and advent of the low-compliance manometry. Using side-hole manometry, it is possible to detect accurate LES pressure that correlates with the strength of the antireflux barrier. The LES pressure as measured by the side-hole manometry, shows respiration-induced pressure oscillations. These pressure oscillations were initially thought to be due to the influence of abdominal and thoracic pressures on the LES. However, it was later pointed out that these pressure oscillations were due to the relative motion of the point pressure sensor (side hole of the manometric catheter) and the LES during respiration. Recent studies suggest that active contraction of the crural diaphragm during inspiration is responsible for the pressure oscillations observed in the cat LES pressure tracings. The use of the sleeve device in the measurement of LES pressure during contraction of the diaphragm has been described recently. Using the principles of manometry and sleeve device, it is now possible to identify two lower esophageal sphincters: the smooth muscle LES, traditionally known as the LES, and crural diaphragm, which we have referred to as the external lower esophageal sphincter. The purpose of the following paper is to summarize the general principles of the infusion manometry in the measurement of intraluminal pressure, specifically the LES pressure. The recently developed technique of detection of the sphincteric function of the crural diaphragm by the sleeve device will be discussed. In the last paragraph the limitations of manometry in detection of the muscular contractile activity are described.     

Discriminative Value of Anorectal Manometry in Clinical Practice

Guidelines recommend anorectal manometry in patients with fecal incontinence and chronic constipation. However, limited evidence supports the utility of manometric testing. We retrospectively reviewed tracings obtained between November 2005 and May 2008. A total of 298 patients (86% women; average age 52 years) were included. The main indications were incontinence (51%) and constipation (42%). Patients suffering from incontinence were older and had lower resting and squeeze pressure compared to continent patients. However, the discriminative power of manometric pressure data was poor, with low sensitivity and specificity. An abnormal straining pattern suggesting dyssynergic defecation was seen in 43% of constipated patients compared to 13% of patients with fecal incontinence. A concordance between manometric patterns and the balloon expulsion test was seen in 72%. The low sensitivity and specificity of manometric parameters does not support the routine use of anorectal manometry in patients with defecation disorders.     

The Favre System for Anorectal Manometry: Comparison with Other Manometry Systems in Vitro and in Healthy Volunteers

Background: The Favre system operates with airflow in a semi-closed circuit to transmit pressure. We aimed to evaluate the Favre system in comparison with other commonly used manometry systems. Methods: The Favre, Amdorfer, Arhan, and Synectics systems were evaluated in vitro and in 14 volunteers. Results: In vitro testing showed no relevant differences for latency, precision, or retest stability. In vivo, maximum resting pressure differed among all probes (P < 0.01) except for Arhan versus Arndorfer (NS). Maximum squeeze pressures differed among all probes (P < 0.01). Decrease of resting pressure during rectoanal inhibitory reflex was similar for Favre versus Arndorfer and Arhan versus Synectics (NS). Retest stability was higher with Favre than with Arndorfer (P < 0.05) and Synectics (P < 0.05) with regard to maximum resting pressure; it was higher with Favre than with Arhan (P < 0.01) and Arndorfer (P < 0.05) with regard to maximum squeeze pressure. Favre caused less discomfort than Synectics (P < 0.05) or Arndorfer (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The Favre probe is an excellent and cost-efficient system for routine anorectal manometry.     

Monitoring of Pharyngeal and Upper Esophageal Sphincter Activity with an Arterial Dilation Balloon Catheter

In patients with dysphagia and radiologic signs of dysfunction of the upper esophageal sphincter (UES), manometry is helpful in giving a better understanding of muscular activity during swallowing. Traditional manometric methods include use of perfusion catheters or solid-state intraluminal strain gauges. The rapid and asymmetric pressure variations in the UES and difficulties compensating for the pharyngolaryngeal elevation during swallowing limit the value of these methods. We used an arterial balloon dilation catheter as a probe in manometric recording of the UES in 28 healthy volunteers. Simultaneous perfusion manometry of the pharynx with the same catheter was performed to assess the coordination of the muscular activity in the esophageal entrance during swallowing. The catheter was well tolerated by all subjects. We found an average resting pressure in the UES of 31.0 mmHg, and the average maximum pressure during contraction was 89.0 mmHg. The average duration of the swallowing act was 3.9 s. All subjects displayed a complete UES relaxation and a normal coordination of propagated pressure in the hypopharynx and UES. The results were highly reproducible and the interindividual range was low. Arterial dilation catheters are safe and have suitable physical properties for pressure monitoring in the UES.     

Endoanal Ultrasound Compared to Anorectal Manometry for the Evaluation of Fecal Incontinence: A Study of the Effect These Tests Have on Clinical Outcome

Tests for evaluating incontinence include endoanal ultrasound (EUS) and anorectal manometry. We hypothesized that EUS would be superior to anorectal manometry in identifying the subset of patients with surgically correctable sphincter defects leading to an improvement in clinical outcome in these patients. The purpose of this study was to compare these 2 techniques to determine which is more predictive of outcome for fecal incontinence. Thirty-five unselected patients with fecal incontinence were prospectively studied with EUS and anorectal manometry to evaluate the internal anal sphincter (IAS) and external anal sphincter (EAS). EUS was performed with Olympus GFUM20 echoendoscope and a hypoechoic defect in the EAS or IAS was considered a positive test. Anorectal manometry was performed with a standard water-perfused catheter system. A peak voluntary squeeze pressure of < 60 mm Hg in women and 120 mm Hg in men was considered a positive test. All patients were administered the Cleveland Clinic Continence Grading Scale at baseline and at follow-up. Improvement in fecal control was defined as a 25% or greater decrease in continence score. EUS versus manometry were compared with subsequent surgical treatment and outcome. P-values were calculated using Fisher's exact test. Patients (n = 32; 31 females) were followed for a mean 25 months (range 13–46). Sixteen patients had improved symptoms (50%). There was no correlation between EUS or anorectal manometry sphincter findings and outcome. Seven of 14 (50%) patients who subsequently underwent surgery versus 9 of 18 (50%) without surgery improved (P = .578). In long-term follow-up, approximately half of patients improve regardless of the results of EUS or anorectal manometry, or whether surgery is performed. Supported in part by a Glaxo-Wellcome Institute for Digestive Health Award.     

固态和水灌注高分辨率测压系统检测食管功能一致性的研究

背景:固态高分辨率测压(SHRM)和水灌注高分辨率测压(WHRM)系统的物理性能特征和测压原理有着本质上的不同,两种HRM对食管测压结果的一致性尚未清楚。目的:比较两种HRM检测食管功能的一致性,并探讨基于SHRM的芝加哥标准是否适用于WH-RM。方法:对健康志愿者和有反流、烧心、胸痛等症状的患者分别行SHRM和WHRM检查。比较两种HRM的食管动力学参数和单次吞咽蠕动类型变化。结果:除上食管括约肌静息压(UESP)外(P=0.086),SHRM的食管动力学指标均明显高于WHRM(P<0.05)。Bland-Altman法表明两种HRM的测压结果一致性差,在临床上不能互相替代。WHRM较SHRM能诊断更多的无蠕动、小缺损和大缺损弱收缩类型(P<0.05)。在所有380次吞咽中,6次吞咽被SHRM判断为高幅蠕动,而WHRM判断为正常蠕动。结论:两种HRM检测食管功能的一致性欠佳,目前基于SHRM的芝加哥标准并不适用于WHRM技术,因此有必要制定基于WHRM数据的食管动力障碍性疾病的诊断标准。     

Use of Simultaneous High-Resolution Endoluminal Sonography (HRES) and Manometry to Characterize High Pressure Zone of Distal Esophagus

The purpose of this investigation was to separate the high pressure zone (HPZ) of the distal esophagus into its two components, the intrinsic lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and the extrinsic crural diaphragm (CD), using simultaneous esophageal manometry and high-resolution endoluminal sonography. Five normal subjects were studied during end inspiration using a dual manometry/ultrasound catheter. The HPZ in the distal esophagus was characterized ultrasonographically as the CD distally and as an overlap of CD and LES proximally. In four of five volunteers, the initial distal rise in pressure at the HPZ corresponded to imaging of CD rather than imaging of the LES. In all subjects, peak pressure corresponded to an overlap of CD and LES. In conclusion, it is possible to divide the HPZ into its two components, the LES and CD using simultaneous high-resolution endoluminal sonography and esophageal manometry. During end inspiration, the CD contributes to the initial distal rise in pressure at the HPZ. Peak pressure of the HPZ corresponds to an overlap of the LES with the CD.     

Anorectal manometry in patients with chronic constipation: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Constipation is a common complaint, but its clinical presentation varies with each individual. The aim of this study was to evaluate anorectal physiology in a prospective group of patients with chronic constipation. METHODOLOGY: A total of 24 consecutive patients with constipation underwent solid-state anorectal manometry. Fifteen healthy controls were also studied. The anorectal parameters included resting and squeeze sphincter pressure, sensory thresholds in response to balloon distension, compliance of rectum, and rectoanal inhibitory reflex (RAIR). RESULTS: The rectal sensitivity for urge and pain did not differ between the groups, but the threshold volume for first sensation was higher in patients with constipation (p < 0.05). There was no group difference in the volume threshold for RAIR. However, the prevalence of impaired RAIR was higher in constipated patients. Anal pressure was lower in patients for maximal squeeze (p < 0.05). There was a positive correlation between the anal sphincter length and resting pressure in patients (r = 0.51, p = 0.03) and healthy controls (r = 0.72, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Constipated patients are characterized by impaired rectal sensitivity and decreased anal sphincter contractile pressure. Anorectal manometry is helpful for diagnosing anorectal dysfunction in patients with chronic constipation.     

Anorectal function in systemic sclerosis

PURPOSE: This study was designed to compare esophageal and anorectal function parameters in patients with systemic sclerosis and to define the role of anorectal manometry in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal involvement of systemic sclerosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-six consecutive patients (22 females) with systemic sclerosis originally referred for assessment of esophageal function were evaluated by esophageal and anorectal manometry. Anorectal function parameters were compared between patients with normal and those with disturbed esophageal function. RESULTS: A total of 17 of 26 patients (65 percent) had severe esophageal dysfunction with aperistalsis of the lower two-thirds of the esophagus, whereas 9 patients (35 percent) had normal esophageal manometry. Only three patients (11.5 percent) suffered from occasional fecal incontinence. Anorectal function parameters (resting pressure, maximum squeeze pressure, perception threshold) were not significantly different between patients with normal and those with disturbed esophageal motility. Rectoanal inhibitory reflex was excitable in nearly 90 percent of patients. CONCLUSION: In an unselected group of patients with systemic sclerosis, fecal incontinence and abnormal anorectal function are rather rare findings. Anorectal manometry cannot differentiate between patients with and without gastrointestinal involvement of systemic sclerosis.     

Accurate placement of the esophageal pH electrode for 24-hour pH monitoring using a combined pH/manometry probe

OBJECTIVE: Accurate placement of a pH electrode requires manometric localization of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES). Combined manometry/pH devices using water-perfused tubes attached to pH catheters and the use of an electronic "LES locator" have been reported. We investigated whether accurate placement of pH probes can be achieved using such a probe, and whether this may reduce the need for the performance of the usual stepwise pull-back manometry. METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients (15 men, 15 women; median age, 56 yr; interquartile range, 42-68 yr) referred for manometry and pH testing were included in the study. The localization of the LES was determined with standard esophageal manometry. After that, a second 3-mm pH electrode with an internal perfusion port was passed into the stomach. Using this catheter, a single stepwise pull-through manometry was performed and the LES position was noted. LES location, mean pressure, and length obtained with standard manometry were compared to data from the combined pH/manometry catheter. Additionally the time necessary to perform each of the procedures was noted and the patient's discomfort caused by the catheter was evaluated using a standardized questionnaire. RESULTS: The LES location with the pH/manometry probe was proximal to that with standard manometry in 19 patients (63%), the same in nine patients (30%), and distal in two patients (7%). The differences were <2 cm in 29 of 30 (97%) patients. The LES location with the pH/manometry probe required a median of 6.5 min (interquartile range: 3.5-8.5 min) versus a median of 21.5 min (interquartile range: 14.5-26.5 min) for standard manometry (p < 0.0001). In addition, LES evaluation using the combined pH/manometry probe provided accurate data on the resting pressure, as well as overall and intraabdominal length of the LES. All patients tolerated the combination probe better than the standard manometry probe (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Placement of the esophageal electrode for 24-h esophageal pH monitoring using a combined pH/manometry probe is accurate. The technique is simple, time-saving, and convenient for the patients. Because it is possible to accurately evaluate the LES using this technique, it may even replace conventional manometry before pH probe placement.     

Effect of Doses of Glucagon Used to Treat Food Impaction on Esophageal Motor Function of Normal Subjects

We studied 10 normal subjects to determine the effect of doses of intravenous glucagon used to treat food impaction on esophageal motor function. With a multilumen assembly perfused by a low compliance pneumohydraulic infusion pump, esophageal manometry was performed during baseline and after randomized administration of 0.25, 0.5, and 1 mg intravenous glucagon. Mean proximal and distal amplitudes of contraction, proximal and distal amplitude of contraction duration, lower esophageal sphincter (LES) resting pressure, percentage of LES relaxation, and glucagon-related side effects were evaluated. No effect on proximal amplitude of contraction and proximal or distal esophageal contraction duration was noted. Mean amplitude of contraction in the distal esophagus was further reduced with increased dosage of glucagon but did not achieve statistical significance. Mean LES resting pressure was significantly reduced after 0.25 mg (18.7 ± 1.8 vs. 10.2 ± 1.5 mmHg, p= 0.0001) and further reduced after 0.5 mg (5.9 ± 1.2 mmHg, p= 0.0009). Mean LES relaxation was significantly reduced after 0.25 mg (93.1 ± 2.4% vs. 63.6 ± 8.8%, p= 0.0031). The 1-mg dose versus the 0.5-mg did not provide further reduction in any LES function parameters. One subject experienced transient nausea after 0.5 mg, and 4 subjects experienced nausea after 1 mg glucagon. In conclusion, increased doses of glucagon further reduce mean distal esophageal amplitude of contraction. Although maximum reduction in mean LES resting pressure was achieved with 0.5 mg, it did not provide any potential therapeutic advantage over 0.25 mg glucagon. Nausea is a common, transient side effect predominantly affecting subjects treated with the 1-mg dose.     

Influence of the catheter diameter on the investigation of the esophageal motility through solid‐state high‐resolution manometry

Past studies have shown that catheter diameter is one of the device‐dependent problems which influence the manometric results in the conventional water perfusion esophageal manometry. High‐resolution solid‐state manometry which abandons water perfusion is thought as an improved manometry method benefited from more pressure sensors, and it is gradually widely used in many present esophageal motility studies. There was no research to evaluate the influence of catheter diameter on the solid‐state high‐resolution manometry results. The aim of this study was to investigate whether solid‐state high‐resolution catheters of different diameter provide different data and results. Nine asymptomatic volunteers and 18 gastroesophageal reflux disease patients accepted high‐resolution manometry examinations with two solid‐state catheters of different outer diameter (4.2 mm and 2.7 mm). Every examination contained 5 minutes resting pressure, 10 water swallows and 10 bread swallows. Some important parameters of the esophageal sphincters and esophageal body peristalsis were analyzed. They included the locations and resting pressure of sphincters, the distal contractile integral, the 4‐second integrated relaxation pressure etc. Then, these parameters and the diagnosis of each swallow based on them provided by the two different diameter catheters were compared. (i) The 4.2 mm thick catheter provided higher upper esophageal sphincter resting pressure than the 2.7 mm thick catheter (59.4 ± 21.1 mmHg vs. 49.7 ± 21.4 mmHg); (ii) the 2.7 mm thick catheter provided higher 4‐second integrated relaxation pressure than the 4.2 mm thick catheter (10.9 ± 4.5 mmHg vs. 8.5 ± 3.8 mmHg) in water swallows; (iii) the mean distal contractile integral of the water and bread swallows in the large diameter catheter were higher than in the small diameter catheter (989.2 ± 650.0 mmHg/cm/s vs. 806.3 ± 563.7 mmHg/cm/s in water swallows, 1762.5 ± 1440.6 mmHg/cm/s vs. 1275.7 ± 982.0 mmHg/cm/s in bread swallows); (iv) on the lower esophageal sphincter resting pressure, most parameters in bread swallows provided by the two catheters were of no statistical significance; (v) the 2.7 mm thick catheter detected more hypotensive peristalsis swallows than the other catheter in water swallows; and (vi) the final diagnosis of about half of the subjects provided by the two catheters were different. The 2.7 mm thick solid‐state high‐resolution manometry catheter provides somewhat different data from the usually used 4.2 mm thick catheter. It is needed to set up different and independent series of normative value for the solid‐state high‐resolution manometry catheters of different outer diameter. The normative value and diagnostic criterion got from one catheter is not universal and acceptable for researches with catheter of different diameter.     

Anorectal Manometry: A New Simplified Technique

Several noninvasive techniques using anal balloons or catheter systems to measure anal sphincter function associated with rectal balloon distention have been used in differentiating functional constipation from aganglionic megacolon. We have developed a simplified method for anorectal manometry that uses a microtip pressure transducer to record anal sphincter responses. Seventy-three patients (51 children and 22 adults) with constipation have been studied with this technique. Normal responses of internal anal sphincter relaxation to rectal distentions were obtained in 60 patients (40 children and 20 adults), consistent with the diagnosis of functional constipation. Abnormal responses-no internal anal sphincter relaxation-were recorded in 13 patients (11 children and two adults), consistent with the diagnosis of Hirschsprung's disease. The manometric diagnosis was confirmed in all 21 patients biopsied. There were no false-positive or false-negative results. The technique is a simple, well tolerated, and rapid method for assessing anal sphincter function.     

直肠前膨出与功能性排便障碍：肛门直肠压力与感觉功能检测

背景：直肠前膨出（RC）是一种多见于女性的肛肠疾病,与功能性排便障碍（FDD）的关系目前尚不明。目的：研究伴RC的FDD患者肛门直肠压力和感觉功能的变化,探讨RC与FDD的关系。方法：选取28例伴RC的FDD患者并分为伴轻度RC的FDD组和伴中-重度RC的FDD组,设不伴RC的FDD患者作为对照。所有患者行球囊排出试验、肛门直肠压力和感觉功能检测,并按照罗马Ⅲ标准将FDD患者进一步分为排便协同失调（F3a）和排便推进不足（F3b）两种亚型。结果：除伴中-重度RC的FDD组直肠排便收缩压显著低于不伴RC的FDD组外（P〈0.05）,其余各组间直肠静息压、肛管静息压、肛管最大缩榨压、直肠排便收缩压、肛门括约肌松弛率以及初始感觉容量、产生便意容量和最大耐受容量均无明显差异。与不伴RC的FDD组相比,伴RC的FDD组中F3b亚型比例显著升高（P〈0.05）。结论：伴中-重度RC的FDD患者直肠排便收缩压明显降低,伴RC的FDD患者多表现为F3b亚型,提示RC与FDD的发病可能具有相关性。     

New Metrics in High-Resolution and High-Definition Anorectal Manometry

Purpose of Review

To review recently published diagnostic methods that use high-resolution (HR-) or high-definition- (HD-) anorectal manometry (ARM) techniques.

Recent Findings

The integrated pressurized volume (IPV) is a new measure based on spatiotemporal plots obtained from HR-ARM. The IPV may be clinically useful for improving the prediction of abnormal balloon expulsion test in patients with constipation and for discriminating patients with anorectal disorders from asymptomatic controls. Combination of IPV parameters was superior to conventional manometric parameters in predicting the responsiveness to biofeedback therapy. Moreover, several novel parameters including the HR-ARM resting integral, HR-ARM squeeze profile, and anorectal asymmetry index may each be useful as predictive factors for identifying patients with fecal incontinence.

Summary

HR- and HD-ARM are increasingly performed worldwide for evaluation of anorectal function. Here, we describe new metrics whose clinical significance has not been fully established. Further standardization and validation of these metrics could provide clinically important new information and could help improve our understanding of the pathophysiology of anorectal disorders.