Premium
The relationships between the results of contemporary tests of anorectal structure and sensorimotor function and the severity of fecal incontinence
Author(s) -
Heitmann Paul T.,
Rabbitt Philippa,
Schloithe Ann C.,
Wattchow David A.,
Scott S. Mark,
Dinning Phil G.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
neurogastroenterology and motility
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.489
H-Index - 105
eISSN - 1365-2982
pISSN - 1350-1925
DOI - 10.1111/nmo.13946
Subject(s) - anorectal manometry , fecal incontinence , endoanal ultrasound , medicine , pudendal nerve , anal canal , internal anal sphincter , constipation , obstructed defecation , high resolution , surgery , urology , rectum , remote sensing , geology
Background Diagnostic investigations for fecal incontinence (FI) assess the structure and sensorimotor function of the anorectum. Investigations include anorectal manometry, anorectal sensory testing, pudendal nerve terminal motor latencies (PNTML), and endoanal sonography. The severity of FI and results of investigations are often discordant and the rate of symptom resolution following treatment remains <40%. High‐resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM) and three‐dimensional endoanal ultrasound (3D‐US) have been introduced during the last decade. This study aims to assess the strength of relationships between contemporary investigation results and FI severity. Methods Adults presenting for investigation of FI were assessed using the St Mark’s FI severity score (SMIS), HRAM, anorectal sensory testing, PNTML, and 3D‐US. Key Results 246 patients were included. There were significant relationships between the SMIS and HRAM (resting pressure r s = −0.23, 95% CI = (−0.34, −0.11), P < .001; squeeze pressure ( r s = −0.26, 95% CI = (−0.37, −0.14), P < .001) and 3D‐US (anterior EAS length r s = −0.22, 95% CI = (−0.34, −0.09), P = .001). The relationships between SMIS and HRAM had a greater effect size in those with urge‐predominant symptoms (resting pressure: r s = −0.40, 95% CI = (−0.57, −0.20), P < .001, squeeze pressure: r s = −0.34, 95% CI = (−0.52, −0.12), P = .003). Overall, the variance in SMIS accounted for by anorectal investigations was 8.6% ( R 2 = 0.098, adjusted R 2 = 0.086, P < .001). Conclusions and Inferences Anorectal investigations are not strong predictors of FI severity. These findings may reflect the multifactorial, heterogeneous pathophysiology of FI, the limitations of the SMIS and anorectal investigations, and contributing factors extrinsic to the anorectum.