Open AccessFeasibility study of defecation studied with a wireless Fecobionics probe in normal subjects
Author(s) -
Gregersen Hans,
Wang Yanmin,
Field Fred,
Wang Mengjun,
Lo Kar Man,
Guo Xiaomei,
Combs William,
Kassab Ghassan S.
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
physiological reports
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.918
H-Index - 39
ISSN - 2051-817X
DOI - 10.14814/phy2.15338
Subject(s) - fecal incontinence , defecation , balloon , medicine , rectum , constipation , anorectal manometry , orientation (vector space) , surgery , mathematics , geometry
Several technologies have been developed for assessing anorectal function including the act of defecation. We used a new prototype of the Fecobionics technology, a multi‐sensor simulated feces, to visualize defecatory patterns and introduced new metrics for anorectal physiology assessment in normal subjects. Fourteen subjects with normal fecal incontinence and constipation questionnaire scores were studied. The 10‐cm‐long Fecobionics device provided measurements of axial pressures, orientation, bending, and shape. The Fecobionics bag was distended to the urge‐to‐defecate level inside rectum where after the subjects were asked to evacuate. Physiological evacuation parameters were assessed. Special attention was paid to the Fecobionics rectoanal pressure gradient (F‐RAPG) during evacuation. Anorectal manometry (ARM) and balloon expulsion test (BET) were done as references. The user interface displayed the fine coordination between pressures, orientation, bending angle, and shape. The pressures showed that Fecobionics was expelled in 11.5 s (quartiles 7.5 and 18.8s), which was shorter than the subjectively reported expulsion time of the BET balloon. Six subjects did not expel the BET balloon within 2 min. The F‐RAPG was 101 (79–131) cmH 2 O, whereas the ARM‐RAPG was −28 (−5 to −47) cmH 2 0 ( p < 0.001). There was no association between the two RAPGs (r 2 = 0.19). Fecobionics showed paradoxical contractions in one subject (7%) compared to 12 subjects with ARM (86%). Fecobionics obtained novel physiological data. Defecatory patterns and data are reported and can be used to guide larger‐scale studies in normal subjects and patients with defecatory disorders. In accordance with other studies, this Fecobionics study questions the value of the ARM‐RAPG.