Efficacy of biofeedback training in improving faecal incontinence and anorectal physiologic function.

The efficacy of biofeedback treatment on faecal incontinence and anorectal function was evaluated in eight patients with faecal incontinence treated with biofeedback training and medical therapy. Outcome and anorectal function were compared with nine faecal incontinent patients who received medical therapy alone. Three month follow up showed that 50% of patients in the biofeedback plus conventional treatment group and 56% of those treated conventionally only had improved. One year follow up showed that 13% in the biofeedback group were free of soiling and an additional 25% had improved. The results were similar in the conventionally treated group--11% were free of soiling and an additional 44% improved. Anal pressures at rest and squeeze, the rectal distension volume that induced sustained inhibition of both the external and internal anal sphincter, and continence to rectally infused saline were significantly reduced in both groups of patients compared with controls (p less than 0.05). Biofeedback treatment had no effect on these abnormal anorectal functions in either patients who improved or those who did not. The improvement in faecal incontinence was probably due to medical intervention or regression of symptoms with time, or both, and not the result of biofeedback training.     

Anal Continence After Rectocele Repair

INTRODUCTION: Rectocele may be associated with both chronic constipation and anal incontinence. Several different surgical procedures have been advocated for rectocele repair. The aim of the present study was to evaluate anorectal function and clinical outcome in a consecutive series of patients who underwent selected endorectal or transperineal surgery for rectocele for whom operative treatment was determined by clinical and proctographic features. Attention was paid to the cohort of rectocele patients presenting with incontinence as a leading symptom. METHODS: Sixty consecutive patients with symptomatic rectocele underwent surgical treatment at our institution. Fifty-eight of the patients were female (mean age 56; range, 21–70 years). Incontinence was graded according to a previously reported scoring system that accounts for the type and frequency of incontinence episodes. Preoperative anorectal manometry was performed using an open perfused polyethylene probe. Rectal sensation was recorded by balloon distention. Endoanal ultrasonography was performed with a 7.5-MHz probe. Preoperative defecography was performed at rest and on maximal squeeze and straining. Patients with obstructed defecation as their principal symptom, with associated mucosal rectal prolapse, underwent an endorectal procedure. For patients with associated anal incontinence (Grade B2 or greater), and without a rectal mucosal prolapse, a transperineal approach was performed with either an anterior external overlapping sphincteroplasty or levatorplasty. The median follow-up was 48 (range, 9–122) months. RESULTS: There was no operative mortality. Postoperative complications occurred in 18 patients (30 percent). Of 43 patients with incontinence, 34 (79 percent) were available for postoperative evaluation. None were fully continent. However, in 25 patients (73.5 percent), continence improved after surgery; half had only mucus soiling or loss of gas. Incontinence scores decreased (i.e., improved) from 4.8 ± 0.9 to 3.9 ± 0.9 (P = 0.002). A significant improvement was found both after transanal and perineal procedures. Only ten initially continent patients were available for postoperative assessment. All patients stated that they had clinical improvement in constipation. Their preoperative mean anal resting pressure was 62.5 ± 3.9 (standard error of the mean) mmHg, with a postoperative mean of 75.5 ± 7 mmHg. The preoperative mean squeeze pressure was 83.1 ± 8.5 mmHg, with a mean postoperative squeeze pressure of 88.5 ± 7.9 mmHg (P = not significant). The maximal tolerable volumes were all within normal limits, confirming the proctographic evidence that there were no cases of megarectum in our patient series. The pudendal nerve terminal motor latency was abnormal in all but two patients with incontinence (mean pudendal nerve terminal motor latency = 3.1; range, 1.2–4 milliseconds). Rectoceles recurred in six patients (10 percent): five after a Block procedure and one after a Sarles-type operation. The postoperative endosonographic appearance varied according to the nature of the procedure performed. CONCLUSION: There are few data concerning patients with rectocele who have associated anal incontinence, however, surgical decision analysis resulted in improvement in both constipation and incontinence in the majority of our patients with rectocele. Nevertheless, because none of the patients gained full continence postoperatively, pelvic floor rehabilitation might be also needed to achieve better sphincter function in patients with incontinence.     

Impaired rectal sensation in idiopathic faecal incontinence

In 15 patients suffering from idiopathic faecal incontinence and in 15 matched controls, manometric studies of anorectal pressure and studies of the rectoanal reflex and rectal sensitivity were carried out. Patients with idiopathic faecal incontinence had normal resting pressure but reduced squeeze and stress pressures; the anal sphincter relaxed before a sensation of rectal distension occurred. The conclusion is that both reduced voluntary muscle contraction and impairment of rectal sensation are conducive to soiling in idiopathic faecal incontinence.     

A prospective non-randomized two-centre study of patients with passive faecal incontinence after birth trauma and patients with soiling after anal surgery, treated by elastomer implants versus rectal irrigation

Aim

This study is a prospective evaluation of patients with passive faecal incontinence and patients with soiling treated by elastomer implants and rectal irrigation.

Patients and methods

Patients with passive faecal incontinence after birth trauma resulting from a defect of the internal sphincter and patients with soiling after previous anal surgery were included. All patients underwent endo-anal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and anal manometry. The patients with passive faecal incontinence were initially treated by anal sphincter exercises and biofeedback therapy during half a year. The patients completed incontinence scores, a quality of life questionnaire, and a 2-week diary card.

Results

The elastomer group consisted of 30 males and 45 females with a mean age of 53?years (25–77). The rectal irrigation group consisted of 32 males and 43 females with a mean age of 50?years (25–74). At 6?months follow-up, 30 patients with soiling of the rectal irrigation group and only nine patients of the elastomer group were completely cured (p?=?0.02). Only three patients with passive faecal incontinence were cured in the rectal irrigation group and none in the elastomer group. Three distal migrations of elastomer implants required removal at follow-up.

Conclusions

After patients had performed anal sphincter exercises, no clear improvement of passive faecal incontinence was obtained by elastomer implants or rectal irrigation. However, rectal irrigation is far more effective than elastomer implants in patients with soiling.     

Anorectal Physiology in Solitary Ulcer Syndrome: A Case-Matched Series

PURPOSE Solitary ulcer syndrome is a rare condition characterized by inflammation and chronic ulcer of the rectal wall in patients suffering from outlet constipation. Despite similar surgical options (rectopexy, anterior resection), solitary ulcer syndrome may differ from overt rectal prolapse with regard to symptoms and pathogenesis. The present work analyzed differences between these conditions in a case-control physiology study. METHODS From 1997 to 2002, 931 consecutive subjects were investigated in a single physiology unit for anorectal functional disorders. Standardized questionnaires, anorectal physiology, and evacuation proctography were included in a prospective database. Diagnosis of solitary ulcer syndrome was based on both symptoms and anatomic features in 25 subjects with no overt rectal prolapse (21 females and 4 males; mean age, 37.2 ± 15.7 years) and no past history of anorectal surgery. They were compared with age-matched and gender-matched subjects: 25 with outlet constipation (also matched on degree of internal procidentia), 25 with overt rectal prolapse without any mucosal change, and 14 with overt rectal prolapse and mucosal changes. RESULTS Subjects with solitary ulcer syndrome reported symptomatic levels (digitations, pain, incontinence) similar to those of patients with outlet constipation, but they had significantly more constipation and less incontinence than patients with overt rectal prolapse. Compared with each of the three control groups (dyschezia, rectal prolapse without mucosal change, and rectal prolapse with mucosal change), subjects with solitary ulcer syndrome more frequently had an increasing anal pressure at strain (15 vs. 5, 3, and 1, respectively ; P < 0.01) and a paradoxical puborectalis contraction (15 vs. 9, 1, and 1, respectively; P < 0.05). With respect to evacuating proctography, complete rectal emptying was achieved less frequently in this group (5 vs. 12, 23, and 10, respectively; P < 0.05). Compared with patients with overt rectal prolapse, mean resting and squeezing anal pressures were significantly higher in both groups of subjects with solitary ulcer syndrome and with outlet constipation. Prevalence and levels of anatomic disorders (perineal descent, rectocele) did not differ among the four groups except for rectal prolapse grade and prevalence of enterocele (higher in overt rectal prolapse group). Interestingly, and despite matched controls for degree of intussusception, individuals with solitary ulcer syndrome had circular internal procidentia more often compared with those suffering from outlet constipation without mucosal lesions (15 vs. 8, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION This case-controlled study quantifies functional anal disorders in patients suffering from solitary ulcer syndrome. Despite no proven etiologic factor, sphincter-obstructed defecation and circular internal procidentia both may play an important part in the pathogenesis and an exclusive surgical approach may not be appropriate in this context. Presented at the meeting of the American Gastroenterology Association, New Orleans, Louisiana, May 18, 2004.     

Critical reappraisal of anorectal function tests in patients with faecal incontinence who have failed conservative treatment

Objective

Anorectal function tests are often performed in patients with faecal incontinence who have failed conservative treatment. This study was aimed to establish the additive value of performing anorectal function tests in these patients in selecting them for surgery.

Patients and methods

Between 2003 and 2009, all referred patients with faecal incontinence were assessed by a questionnaire, anorectal manometry and anal endosonography. Patients with diarrhea, inflammatory bowel disease, pouches or rectal carcinoma were excluded.

Results

In total, 218 patients were evaluated. Of these, 107 (49%) patients had no sphincter defects, 71 (33%) had small defects and 40 (18%) had large defects. Anorectal manometry could not differentiate between patients with and without sphincter defects. Patients with sphincter defects were only found to have a significantly shorter sphincter length and reduced rectal capacity compared to patients without sphincter defects. Forty-three patients (20%) had a normal anal pressures ≥40?mmHg. Seventeen patients (8%) had also a dyssynergic pelvic floor both on clinical examination and anorectal manometry. Fifteen patients (7%) had a reduced rectal capacity between 65 and 100?ml. There was no difference in anal pressures or the presence of sphincter defects in these patients compared to patients with a rectal capacity >150?ml. There was no correlation between anorectal manometry, endosonography and faecal incontinence severity scores.

Conclusion

In patients with faecal incontinence who have failed conservative treatment, only anal endosonography can reveal sphincter defects. Anorectal manometry should be reserved for patients eligible for surgery to exclude those with suspected dyssynergic floor or reduced rectal capacity.     

Disorders of impaired fecal control a clinical and manometric study

Two hundred eight patients with retention disorders have been studied. Most frequent causes were idiopathic (107), iatrogenic (57), and obstetric (33). Twenty-five patients experienced soiling, 31 had insufficient function, and 152 complained of incontinence. Seventy percent of patients with idiopathic incontinence did not experience urge, compared with 38 percent with iatrogenic and only 3 percent with obstetric incontinence. The incidence of prolapse was 58 percent in patients with idiopathic incontinence, 20 percent in patients with iatrogenic incontinence, and only 3 percent in patients with obstetric incontinence. The authors conclude that the function of the puborectalis sling is to create the anorectal angle to evoke the feeling of urge and to support intra-abdominal contents and, furthermore, that fecal incontinence after anorectal surgery was likely caused by denervation. Anal resting and squeeze pressures varied widely. There was a huge overlap in the different groups. Mean resting and squeeze pressures were 9.5 kPa and 9.4 kPa, respectively, in controls, 4.8 kPa and 10.3 kPa, respectively, in the soiling group, 7.1 and 6.1 kPa, respectively, in the insufficient group, and 5.1 and 2.7 kPa, respectively, in the incontinent group. An incontinent external sphincter function could be defined as a function of the external sphincter causing a pressure increase of 5 kPa or less during straining. The ability to retain feces, therefore, is based on external sphincter function. Anal manometry is, indeed, a suitable technique to determine anal sphincter functions, but the presence of a retention disorder cannot definitely be determined. Its clinical application remains under discussion.     

Why do patients with faecal impaction have faecal incontinence.

To elucidate the phenomenon of faecal incontinence in impacted patients, manometric, radiological and other investigations were carried out in 55 elderly patients, who had impacted masses of faeces in the rectum and were incontinent of faeces and 36 elderly control subjects with no anorectal problems. Maximum basal pressure and the maximum squeeze pressure in impacted patients were not significantly different from elderly controls. Sphincter pressures were no different after disimpaction than they were with faecal masses in situ, suggesting that leakage and soiling were not caused by stretching of the anal ring or prolonged reflex inhibition of anal tone by the faecal mass. The anorectal angle was more obtuse in impacted patients than in elderly controls though there was no greater degree of perineal descent. Anal and perianal sensation was impaired in impacted patients compared with controls. Rectal sensation was also impaired in the impacted patients in that the volume in a rectal balloon that could be perceived by the subject and the volume that gave rise to a desire to defecate were much higher in impacted patients than in controls. The rectal volume required to cause anal relaxation was lower in impacted patients compared with controls though there was no reduction in the volume at which anal relaxation failed to recover its resting tone. Rectal distension elicited external sphincter contractions in 53% impacted patients compared with 80% of controls. In conclusion, faecal soiling in patients with faecal impaction is probably related to the combination of an obtuse anorectal angle and the low anal pressures, normally found in the elderly and to impaired anorectal sensation which prevents conscious contraction of the external sphincter when the internal sphincter is relaxed.     

Selection criteria for anterior rectal wall repair in symptomatic rectocele and anterior rectal wall prolapse

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to determine the outcome and changes produced by an endorectal anterior wall repair in objective functional parameters using anorectal manometry and defecography and to asses their usefulness in the selection of patients for the operation. METHODS: Between 1986 and 1990, we performed a prospective study of 76 consecutive patients with symptomatic rectocele and/or an anterior rectal wall prolapse. All patients were studied prospectively according to a fixed protocol. Standard questionnaire, defecation diary, clinical examination, defecography, and anal manometry were performed preoperatively and three to four months postoperatively. RESULTS: Three months postoperatively, 38 patients (50 percent) had no complaints at all (excellent result), 32 (42 percent) had only a minor complaint (good result), and in 6 patients (8 percent) the complaints were essentially unchanged (unsatisfactory result). After one year, similar figures were obtained. The postoperative mean stool frequency in all patients after three months was significantly increased (P <0.05) but not after one year. Postoperative defecographies showed a complete absence or significant diminution of the rectocele at three months and were significantly correlated with relief of symptoms. An inverse correlation was found between improvement in incontinence grade after operation and (larger) preoperative volume at which urge to defecate was elicited, making it a good predictor of improvement in incontinence by the operation. CONCLUSIONS: The anterior rectal wall repair positively influences rectal sensation in patients with incontinence and/or obstructed defecation caused by a rectocele and/or an anterior rectal wall prolapse. Anorectal manometry was useful in studying the beneficial physiologic effects of the endorectal repair. In patients with no previous pelvic surgery, a large urge to defecate volume is a good predictor of a good clinical outcome.     

Role of manometry, defecography and anal endosonography in the evaluation of colorectal disorders.

OBJECTIVE: altered motility or anatomy of the rectum, anus and perineal floor may lead to symptoms which are unresponsive to routine therapeutic approaches. These disturbances usually lead to constipation, fecal incontinence, or both. Different tests and techniques for evaluating anorectal and perineal disorders, developed in the last two decades, make a better understanding of these disorders possible. This study was designed to evaluate the diagnostic benefits of combining manometry, defecography and anal endosonography in the assessment of patients with anorectal disorders. METHODS: twenty-five children with constipation (with or without soiling), incontinence and/or prolapse underwent anal manometry, defecography and anal endosonography. Group A consisted of 9 children with fecal incontinence, group B consisted of 10 children with constipation with soiling, and group C comprised 6 children with constipation without soiling. RESULTS: in group A resting incontinence was associated with a hypotonic external sphincter in 4 out of 9 patients, 2 of whom had internal anal sphincter thinning. In group B resting incontinence was associated with a hypotonic external sphincter in 8 out of 10 patients, 6 of whom had internal anal sphincter thinning. In group C these associations were not seen in any of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: barium enema is not sufficient for an accurate diagnosis of anorectal disorders. No single test is capable of revealing the type of disease. Anal manometry, defecography and endosonography are complementary procedures in the assessment of this group of disorders. This new approach will improve our knowledge of the pathogenesis of these disorders in children. However, further studies are needed to obtain conclusive evidence.     

Manometric evaluation of rectal prolapse and faecal incontinence.

Sixty-three patients with complete rectal prolapse and/or faecal incontinence have undergone anal manometry and the results have been compared with an equal number of age- and sex-matched controls. Maximal basal pressure (MBP) and maximum squeeze pressure (MSP) were measured before and at four months and a year after treatment. The anal pressures of normal subjects are presented. Patients with rectal prolapse alone had normal anal pressures, whereas patients with incontinence with or without prolapse had significantly lower basal and squeeze pressures than controls. Successful surgical treatment of prolapse or incontinence did not produce significant change in anal canal pressures, whereas the combination of pelvic floor exercises and a continence aid was associated with a significant rise in MSP.     

Rectocele repair improves evacuation and prolapse complaints independent of anorectal function and colonic transit time

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Evacuation disorders associated with a rectocele can be improved by rectocele repair. This study investigated whether anorectal function tests results change after rectocele repair. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fourteen patients with 2nd or 3rd degree rectocele and evacuation disorder were treated by posterior colporrhaphy and evaluated pre- and postoperatively (after 8 months, range 3-14) using questionnaires, anal manometry and endosonography, rectal barostat testing, and colonic transit time measurement with radio-opaque markers. Results from female controls were used for comparison. RESULTS: Preoperatively, rectocele patients had high maximal basal sphincter pressures, large sphincter lengths, and low maximal squeeze pressures, with an anal sphincter defect in seven and lower visceral sensitivity scores than in controls. Postprandial rectal responses (more than 10% decrease in postprandial volume after 1 h) were found in 3 of 14 patients compared to 2 of 11 parous and 9 of 11 nulliparous controls. After repair, a rectocele of 2nd degree was found in four patients. Questionnaire scores were significantly decreased for straining, evacuation disorder, manual support, and protrusion. Overall patient satisfaction with the operation scored 8.25 (range 3-10). Defecation frequencies and stool consistencies were unaltered. Anal pressures, rectal compliance-curves, visceral sensitivity, and colonic transit times were unaltered after the rectocele repair. CONCLUSION: Rectocele repair improved complaints of evacuation disorder and protrusion, but defecation frequency and stool consistency were not affected. Anorectal function was unaltered after rectocele repair. Selection of patients for rectocele repair should be performed based on evacuation and protrusion complaints, anorectal function, or colonic transit time measurements have a limited role.     

Utility of a combined test of anorectal manometry, electromyography, and sensation in determining the mechanism of ''idiopathic'' faecal incontinence.

Combined tests of anorectal manometry, sphincter electromyography and rectal sensation were carried out in 302 patients with faecal incontinence (235 women, 67 men). The results obtained were compared with 65 normal subjects (35 women, 30 men). A mechanism for incontinence was identified in all and the majority of patients had more than one abnormality. Two hundred and seventy eight patients (92%) had a weak external anal sphincter, 185 of these (67%, mostly women) also showed abnormal perineal descent, and 14 women showed clinical evidence of sphincter damage as a result of obstetric trauma. Ten per cent of patients with impaired external anal sphincter contraction showed associated evidence of spinal disease (impaired rectal sensation plus attenuated or enhanced reflex external anal sphincter activity). Unlike the other groups, the 'spinal' group contained equal numbers of men and women. Ninety seven patients (32%) had evidence of a weak internal anal sphincter. The external sphincter was also very weak and 92% of these patients also had perineal descent. Eighty two patients (27%) showed an unstable internal sphincter, characterised by prolonged 'spontaneous' anal relaxation under resting conditions and an abnormal reduction in anal pressure after conscious contraction of the sphincter or an increase in intraabdominal pressure. One hundred and forty two patients (47%) had a hypersensitive rectum associated with enhanced anorectal responses to rectal distension. All these patients had an abnormally weak external sphincter, suggesting that the hypersensitive or 'irritable' rectum should not be regarded as a cause of faecal incontinence unless accompanied by external sphincter weakness. Twenty four patients (8%) showed a normal basal and squeeze pressures and impaired rectal sensation; six showed giant rectal contractions during rectal distension. The results show that idiopathic faecal incontinence is not caused by a single abnormality, and it is suggested that combined anorectal manometry, electromyography, and sensory testing is a useful technique to identify the causes of faecal incontinence and provide a basis for appropriate treatment.     

Characteristic findings on defecography according to reconstruction method and defecatory disorder following sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study used postoperative defecography to characterize morphological features of defecatory disorders in patients following rectal resection. We also evaluated differences in dynamic defecatory condition depending on reconstruction methods for sphincter-saving surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects comprised 62 patients (male/female, 41/21; mean age, 61 years) who underwent defecography after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. Semisolid barium (100 ml) was introduced into the rectum, and images were taken in a sitting position. Characteristic dynamic findings in defecography were evaluated according to operative methods and were compared with symptoms of defecatory disorders. RESULTS: Defecographic findings closely associated with postoperative defecatory disorder were as follows: (1) low volume of neorectum in patients with worse incontinence grade (p < 0.05), (2) low evacuation fraction in patients with significantly impaired function such as soiling, urgency, and worsened incontinence score (p < 0.05), (3) minor alteration of anorectal angle at evacuation in patients with major soiling and worsened incontinence score (p < 0.05), and (4) barium shadow in the anal canal at rest in patients with urgency (p < 0.05). By reconstruction method, the J-pouch displayed a larger volume than straight anastomosis but a significantly wider anorectal angle than high anterior resection (HAR). Side-to-end anastomosis offered a moderate volume and a sharp anorectal angle as in HAR. CONCLUSIONS: Defecography is useful for visualizing and characterizing defecatory disorders following rectal resection. Based on defecography, J-pouch reconstruction offers advantageous volume, while side-to-end anastomosis provides a more acute anorectal angle for patients who have received rectal resection with low anastomosis. A new reconstruction method offering both advantages was discussed.     

Abdominal rectopexy for complete rectal prolapse: preliminary results of a new technique

Purpose Although the technique for the surgical repair of rectal prolapse has advanced over the years, no ideal procedure has been found. We aim to test a new surgical procedure for abdominal rectopexy that uses the greater omentum to support the rectum below the rectopexy, to reconstruct the anorectal angle and dispense with the need for synthetic mesh, thus reducing the risk of infection.Methods A series of ten patients, all young and medically fit, underwent repair surgery for rectal prolapse with the new rectopexy technique. Some patients had concomitant sigmoidectomy. Preoperative and postoperative assessment included a clinical examination, anal manometry and defecography.Results Follow-up lasted a mean of 56.4 months. None of the patients had recurrent rectal prolapse or infection. Postoperative assessment at 24 months disclosed significant improvements in all the bowel and sphincter variables assessed. The 8 patients who had severe incontinence preoperatively had notably improved and 4 were fully continent, 3 moderately incontinent, and only 1 patient had persistently high levels of incontinence. In only 1 patient who initially had severe incontinence, continence completely regressed and severe constipation developed. Maximal basal pressure values increased significantly after surgery (p=0.0025), although they increased slightly less evidently in patients in whom marked incontinence persisted at postoperative follow-up. Maximal voluntary contraction pressure also increased significantly after surgery (p=0.0054), although the values changed less than those for basal pressure. During rest, squeeze and straining, and in all the patients who regained continence, even those who recovered it only partly, surgery substantially reduced the anorectal angle. The reduction during rest was statistically significant (p=0.0062).Conclusions The rectopexy technique we tested in patients with rectal prolapse avoids the need for synthetic mesh, and provides good results in terms of bowel and sphincter function, without infection or recurrence.     

Transanal repair of rectocele and full rectal mucosectomy with one circular stapler: a novel surgical technique

Abstract We present a new surgical stapling technique for treatment of rectocele when associated with internal mucosal prolapse or haemorrhoids using only one circular mechanical stapler. Eight female patients, mean age 53 years (range, 42–70), complaining of obstructed defecation with vaginal digitation because of rectocele associated with internal mucosal prolapse underwent transanal repair of rectocele and rectal mucosectomy using one circular stapler between April and July 2004. A running horizontal mattress suture was placed through the base of the rectocele including mucosa, submucosa and the muscle layer of the whole anterior anorectal junction wall. The prolapsed mucosa and the muscular layer were then excised with an electrical scapel. Acontinuous pursestring rectal mucosa suture was placed 0.5 cm before the previous anterior mucosa and muscle layers resected wound, including the anorectal junction wall which was kept separate from the posterior vaginal wall by a Babcock forceps. Posteriorly, the pursestring suture included only mucosal and submucosal layers. The stapled suture was positioned between normal anterior rectal wall and the anal canal, 0.5 cm above the pectinate line. The stapler was then closed, fired and withdrawn. One patient complained of a perianal hematoma on the seventh postoperative day, requiring surgical excision. Postoperative defecography showed correction of the rectocele and outlet obstruction disappeared in all patients. This novel combined manual-stapled technique for rectocele and rectal internal mucosal prolapse seems to be a safe procedure and the preliminary results are encouraging. Further investigations have to be performed to assess long-term outcome in a larger number of patients.     

Rectal compliance as a routine measurement

PURPOSE: The clinical impact of rectal compliance and sensitivity measurement is not clear. The aim of this study was to measure the rectal compliance in different patient groups compared with controls and to establish the clinical effect of rectal compliance. METHODS: Anorectal function tests were performed in 974 consecutive patients (284 men). Normal values were obtained from 24 controls. Rectal compliance measurement was performed by filling a latex rectal balloon with water at a rate of 60 ml per minute. Volume and intraballoon pressure were measured. Volume and pressure at three sensitivity thresholds were recorded for analysis: first sensation, urge, and maximal toleration. At maximal toleration, the rectal compliance (volume/pressure) was calculated. Proctoscopy, anal manometry, anal mucosal sensitivity, and anal endosonography were also performed as part of our anorectal function tests. RESULTS: No effect of age or gender was observed in either controls or patients. Patients with fecal incontinence had a higher volume at first sensation and a higher pressure at maximal toleration (P=0.03), the presence of a sphincter defect or low or normal anal pressures made no difference. Patients with constipation had a larger volume at first sensation and urge (P<0.0001 andP<0.01). Patients with a rectocele had a larger volume at first sensation (P=0.004). Patients with rectal prolapse did not differ from controls; after rectopexy, rectal compliance decreased (P<0.0003). Patients with inflammatory bowel disease had a lower rectal compliance, most pronounced in active proctitis (P=0.003). Patients with ileoanal pouches also had a lower compliance (P<0.0001). In the 17 patients where a maximal toleration volume<60 ml was found, 11 had complaints of fecal incontinence, and 6 had a stoma. In 31 patients a maximal toleration volume between 60 and 100 ml was found; 12 patients had complaints of fecal incontinence, and 6 had a stoma. Proctitis or pouchitis was the main cause for a small compliance. All 29 patients who had a maximal toleration volume>500 ml had complaints of constipation. No correlation between rectal and anal mucosal sensitivity was found. CONCLUSION: Rectal compliance measurement with a latex balloon is easily feasible. In this series of 974 patients, some patient groups showed an abnormal rectal visceral sensitivity and compliance, but there was an overlap with controls. Rectal compliance measurement gave a good clinical impression about the contribution of the rectum to the anorectal problem. Patients with proctitis and pouchitis had the smallest rectal compliance. A maximal toleration volume<60 ml always led to fecal incontinence, and stomas should be considered for such patients. A maximal toleration volume>500 ml was only seen in constipated patients, and therapy should be given to prevent further damage to the pelvic floor. Values close to or within the normal range rule out the rectum as an important factor in the anorectal problem of the patient.Drs. Sloots and Poen were supported by a grant from Janssen-Cilag. Presented at the meeting of the Dutch Society of Gastroenterology, Veldhoven, the Netherlands, October 7 to 8, 1999.     

Effectiveness of anorectal biofeedback therapy for faecal incontinence: medium-term results

The medium-term effectiveness of biofeedback training for faecal incontinence was studied. Seventy-eight patients with minor incontinence underwent 4 supervised biofeedback sessions, and were followed for a minimum of 2 years. Results were correlated to aetiology, severity, anorectal physiological and endoanal ultrasound measurements. Four weeks following completion of the sessions, 59 patients (76%) improved significantly, 13 (17%) did improved slightly and 6 (8%) not change. At latest follow-up (mean, 26.3 months), only 10 (13%) had regressed, but they recovered after repeat biofeedback. Incontinence associated with previous colonic and rectal resection or perianal surgery responded significantly better to the training than patients with primary neurogenic incontinence (p=0.001). Patients with endoanal ultrasound sphincter defects also did better than those with primary neurogenic incontinence (p=0.02). In conclusion, biofeedback training is an efficient therapy in the majority of patients with minor faecal incontinence. Received: 19 January 2001 / Accepted in revised form: 15 May 2001     

Anorectal dysfunction and rectal prolapse in progressive systemic sclerosis

Our aim was to characterize the clinical spectrum of anorectal dysfunction among eight patients with progressive systemic sclerosis (PSS) who presented with altered bowel movements with or without fecal incontinence. The anorectum was assessed by physical examination, proctosigmoidoscopy, and anorectal manometry. There was concomitant involvement of the other regions of the digestive tract in all patients as determined by barium studies, endoscopy, or manometry: eight esophageal, three gastric, four small bowel, and two colonic. Seven patients had fecal incontinence, and four also had second-degree complete rectal prolapse. Abnormal anorectal function, particularly abnormal anal sphincter resting pressures, were detected in all patients; anal sphincter pressures were lower in those with rectal prolapse. Rectal capacity and wall compliance were impaired in seven of seven patients. Successful surgical correction of prolapse in three patients resulted in restoration of incontinence for six months and seven years in two of the three patients. We conclude that rectal dysfunction and weakness of the anal sphincters are important factors contributing, respectively, to altered bowel movements and fecal incontinence in patients with gastrointestinal involvement by PSS. Rectal prolapse worsens anal sphincter dysfunction and should be sought routinely as it is a treatable factor aggravating fecal incontinence in patients with PSS.This work was presented in part at the Annual Meeting of the American Gastroenterological Association, May 1992, and appears in abstract form in Gastroenterology 1992;102:A473.Supported in part by the General Clinical Research Center Grant 00585 from the National Institutes of Health.     

Pelvic floor neuropathy: a comparative study of diabetes mellitus and idiopathic faecal incontinence.

Twenty one patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy, 18 with idiopathic faecal incontinence and 11 normal controls were studied with techniques of mucosal electrosensitivity, rectal distension for the quantitative assessment of anorectal sensation, and manometric and electromyographic tests for the assessment of anorectal motor function. An asymptomatic sensorimotor deficit was found in the anal canal of patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Mucosal electrosensitivity thresholds in the anal canal were significantly higher (p less than 0.01 v controls) and fibre density of the external anal sphincter significantly raised (p less than 0.0001 v controls). Anal manometry and pudendal nerve terminal motor latencies were similar to controls. In patients with idiopathic faecal incontinence the tests of sensory and motor function also showed a sensorimotor neuropathy; compared with controls, mucosal electrosensitivity thresholds were significantly higher (p less than 0.002), anal canal resting and maximum squeeze pressures were significantly lower (p less than 0.05 and p less than 0.002 respectively), and pudendal nerve terminal motor latencies and fibre density of the external anal sphincter were significantly raised (both p less than 0.05). Sensory thresholds to rectal distension were similar in all groups. Pelvic floor sensorimotor neuropathy in diabetic patients has several features in common with that of patients with idiopathic faecal incontinence but its functional significance remains uncertain.