Comparative study of magnetic resonance defaecography and evacuation proctography in the evaluation of obstructed defaecation

Dyssynergic Defecation and Other Evacuation Disorders

Constipated patients are frequently referred to gastroenterologists for symptoms refractory to lifestyle modifications and laxatives. Dyssynergic defecation, the dyscoordination of rectoanal, abdominal, and pelvic floor muscles to facilitate defecation, is a major cause of refractory primary constipation. Understanding of the diagnosis, evaluation, and management of dyssynergic defecation and other evacuation disorders will allow providers to effectively manage these patients. This review focuses on the definition, pathophysiology, evaluation, and treatment of dyssynergic defecation and other evacuation disorders. Emerging treatments for these disorders include home biofeedback therapy for dyssynergic defecation and translumbosacral neuromodulation therapy for levator ani syndrome.

Imaging modalities for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with obstructed defaecation syndrome

BACKGROUND

Obstructed defaecation syndrome (ODS) is difficulty in evacuating stools, requiring straining efforts at defaecation, having the sensation of incomplete evacuation, or the need to manually assist defaecation. This is due to a physical blockage of the faecal stream during defaecation attempts, caused by rectocele, enterocele, intussusception, anismus or pelvic floor descent. Evacuation proctography (EP) is the most common imaging technique for diagnosis of posterior pelvic floor disorders. It has been regarded as the reference standard because of extensive experience, although it has been proven not to have perfect accuracy. Moreover, EP is invasive, embarrassing and uses ionising radiation. Alternative imaging techniques addressing these issues have been developed and assessed for their accuracy. Because of varying results, leading to a lack of consensus, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature are required.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic test accuracy of EP, dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and pelvic floor ultrasound for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with ODS, using latent class analysis in the absence of a reference standard, and to assess whether MRI or ultrasound could replace EP. The secondary objective was to investigate differences in diagnostic test accuracy in relation to the use of rectal contrast, evacuation phase, patient position and cut-off values, which could influence test outcome.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran an electronic search on 18 December 2019 in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, SCI, CINAHL and CPCI. Reference list, Google scholar. We also searched WHO ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible articles. Two review authors conducted title and abstract screening and full-text assessment, resolving disagreements with a third review author.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Diagnostic test accuracy and cohort studies were eligible for inclusion if they evaluated the test accuracy of EP, and MRI or pelvic floor ultrasound, or both, for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with ODS. We excluded case-control studies. If studies partially met the inclusion criteria, we contacted the authors for additional information.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors performed data extraction, including study characteristics, 'Risk-of-bias' assessment, sources of heterogeneity and test accuracy results. We excluded studies if test accuracy data could not be retrieved despite all efforts. We performed meta-analysis using Bayesian hierarchical latent class analysis. For the index test to qualify as a replacement test for EP, both sensitivity and specificity should be similar or higher than the historic reference standard (EP), and for a triage test either specificity or sensitivity should be similar or higher. We conducted heterogeneity analysis assessing the effect of different test conditions on test accuracy. We ran sensitivity analyses by excluding studies with high risk of bias, with concerns about applicability, or those published before 2010. We assessed the overall quality of evidence (QoE) according to GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies covering 2483 participants were included into the meta-analyses. We produced pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for all index tests for each target condition. Findings of the sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main analysis. Sensitivity of EP for diagnosis of rectocele was 98% (credible interval (CrI)94%-99%), enterocele 91%(CrI 83%-97%), intussusception 89%(CrI 79%-96%) and pelvic floor descent 98%(CrI 93%-100%); specificity for enterocele was 96%(CrI 93%-99%), intussusception 92%(CrI 86%-97%) and anismus 97%(CrI 94%-99%), all with high QoE. Moderate to low QoE showed a sensitivity for anismus of 80%(CrI 63%-94%), and specificity for rectocele of 78%(CrI 63%-90%) and pelvic floor descent 83%(CrI 59%-96%). Specificity of MRI for diagnosis of rectocele was 90% (CrI 79%-97%), enterocele 99% (CrI 96%-100%) and intussusception 97% (CrI 88%-100%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with high QoE. MRI did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Heterogeneity analysis showed that sensitivity of MRI performed with evacuation phase was higher than without for rectocele (94%, CrI 87%-98%) versus 65%, CrI 52% to 89%, and enterocele (87%, CrI 74%-95% versus 62%, CrI 51%-88%), and sensitivity of MRI without evacuation phase was significantly lower than EP. Specificity of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) for diagnosis of rectocele was 89% (CrI 81%-96%), enterocele 98% (CrI 95%-100%) and intussusception 96% (CrI 91%-99%); sensitivity for anismus was 92% (CrI 72%-98%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with high QoE. TPUS did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Heterogeneity analysis showed that sensitivity of TPUS performed with rectal contrast was not significantly higher than without for rectocele(92%, CrI 69%-99% versus 81%, CrI 58%-95%), enterocele (90%, CrI 71%-99% versus 67%, CrI 51%-90%) and intussusception (90%, CrI 69%-98% versus 61%, CrI 51%-86%), and was lower than EP. Specificity of endovaginal ultrasound (EVUS) for diagnosis of rectocele was 76% (CrI 54%-93%), enterocele 97% (CrI 80%-99%) and intussusception 93% (CrI 72%-99%); sensitivity for anismus was 84% (CrI 59%-96%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with very low to moderate QoE. EVUS did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Specificity of dynamic anal endosonography (DAE) for diagnosis of rectocele was 88% (CrI 62%-99%), enterocele 97% (CrI 75%-100%) and intussusception 93% (CrI 65%-99%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with very low to moderate QoE. DAE did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Echodefaecography (EDF) had a sensitivity of 89% (CrI 65%-98%) and specificity of 92% (CrI 72%-99%) for intussusception, meeting the criteria to replace EP but with very low QoE. Specificity of EDF for diagnosis of rectocele was 89% (CrI 60%-99%) and for enterocele 97% (CrI 87%-100%); sensitivity for anismus was 87% (CrI 72%-96%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with low to very low QoE.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In a population of women with symptoms of ODS, none of the imaging techniques met the criteria to replace EP. MRI and TPUS met the criteria of a triage test, as a positive test confirms diagnosis of rectocele, enterocele and intussusception, and a negative test rules out diagnosis of anismus. An evacuation phase increased sensitivity of MRI. Rectal contrast did not increase sensitivity of TPUS. QoE of EVUS, DAE and EDF was too low to draw conclusions. More well-designed studies are required to define their role in the diagnostic pathway of ODS.

Anorectal Physiology Testing for Prolapse-What Tests are Necessary?

Rectal prolapse frequently occurs in conjunction with functional and anatomic abnormalities of the bowel and pelvic floor. Prolapse surgery should have as its goal not only to correct the prolapse, but also to improve function to the greatest extent possible. Careful history-taking and physical exam continue to be the surgeon's best tools to put rectal prolapse in its functional context. Physiologic testing augments this and informs surgical decision-making. Defecography can identify concomitant middle compartment prolapse and pelvic floor hernias, potentially targeting patients for urogynecologic consultation or combined repair. Other tests, including manometry, ultrasound, and electrophysiologic testing, may be of utility in select cases. Here, we provide an overview of available testing options and their individual utility in rectal prolapse.

Assessing Anorectal Function in Constipation and Fecal Incontinence

Constipation and fecal incontinence are commonly encountered complaints in the gastrointestinal clinic. Assessment of anorectal function includes comprehensive history, rectal examination, and prospective stool diary or electronic App diary that accurately captures bowel symptoms, evaluation of severity, and quality of life of measure. Evaluation of a suspected patient with dyssynergic constipation includes anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion test, and defecography. Investigation of a suspected patient with fecal incontinence includes high-resolution anorectal manometry; anal ultrasound or MRI; and neurophysiology tests, such as translumbosacral anorectal magnetic stimulation or pudendal nerve latency. This article provides an approach to the assessment of anorectal function.

European society of neurogastroenterology and motility guidelines on functional constipation in adults

INTRODUCTION

Chronic constipation is a common disorder with a reported prevalence ranging from 3% to 27% in the general population. Several management strategies, including diagnostic tests, empiric treatments, and specific treatments, have been developed. Our aim was to develop European guidelines for the clinical management of constipation.

DESIGN

After a thorough review of the literature by experts in relevant fields, including gastroenterologists, surgeons, general practitioners, radiologists, and experts in gastrointestinal motility testing from various European countries, a Delphi consensus process was used to produce statements and practical algorithms for the management of chronic constipation.

KEY RESULTS

Seventy-three final statements were agreed upon after the Delphi process. The level of evidence for most statements was low or very low. A high level of evidence was agreed only for anorectal manometry as a comprehensive evaluation of anorectal function and for treatment with osmotic laxatives, especially polyethylene glycol, the prokinetic drug prucalopride, secretagogues, such as linaclotide and lubiprostone and PAMORAs for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation. However, the level of agreement between the authors was good for most statements (80% or more of the authors). The greatest disagreement was related to the surgical management of constipation.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

European guidelines on chronic constipation, with recommendations and algorithms, were developed by experts. Despite the high level of agreement between the different experts, the level of scientific evidence for most recommendations was low, highlighting the need for future research to increase the evidence and improve treatment outcomes in these patients.

The patient's experience of defaecating proctography: Comparing magnetic resonance with conventional fluoroscopy techniques

INTRODUCTION

Fluoroscopy and MRI are currently used to investigate defaecation and pelvic floor dysfunction, with advantages and disadvantages to both modalities. Anecdotally it is suspected that MRI, allowing more privacy, may be better tolerated by patients but that symptoms may be more easily replicated with fluoroscopic technique due to the physiological position. The aim of this study was to evaluate the patient experience of both techniques to potentially help guide the choice of defaecating proctography modality in the future.

METHODS

This prospective study was conducted June 2015-March 2017 in a large teaching hospital. Patients undergoing fluoroscopy (FDP) or MR defaecating proctography (MRDP) completed a post-procedure questionnaire rating their satisfaction (1-5, 5 being most satisfied) of different aspects of the test.

RESULTS

24 patients underwent FDP and 17 MRDP. Both procedures were scored highly in general for all questions with mean >4.1 and median 5, out of 5. Though not statistically significant, the mean scores for all aspects of the test were slightly higher for fluoroscopy than MR. As well as scoring higher for comfort (4.8 vs 4.4) and dignity maintained (4.6 vs 4.1), the patients who underwent fluoroscopy thought it was easier to replicate symptoms than the patient who underwent MR defaecating proctography (4.6 vs 4.2).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that both FDP and MRDP are well tolerated in the investigation of defaecation and pelvic floor dysfunction. FDP was scored consistently higher than MRDP, but this was not statistically significant. Thus, this study suggests that patient tolerance of the test is unlikely to be any worse for FDP than for MRDP. Clinicians and radiologists should take into account risks of radiation exposure as well as potential for surgical management when making their decision as to which test is appropriate. The authors recommend that if the patient is unable to replicate their symptoms in MRDP, fluoroscopy should be performed to ensure significant pathology is not being missed.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: defecography should be a first-line diagnostic modality in patients with refractory constipation

BACKGROUND

Defecography is considered the reference standard for the assessment of pelvic floor anatomy and function in patients with a refractory evacuation disorder. However, the overlap of radiologically significant findings seen in patients with chronic constipation (CC) and healthy volunteers is poorly defined.

AIM

To systematically review rates of structural and functional abnormalities diagnosed by barium defecography and/or magnetic resonance imaging defecography (MRID) in patients with symptoms of CC and in healthy volunteers.

METHODS

Electronic searches of major databases were performed without date restrictions.

RESULTS

From a total of 1760 records identified, 175 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. 63 studies were included providing data on outcomes of 7519 barium defecographies and 668 MRIDs in patients with CC, and 225 barium defecographies and 50 MRIDs in healthy volunteers. Pathological high-grade (Oxford III and IV) intussuscepta and large (>4 cm) rectoceles were diagnosed in 23.7% (95% CI: 16.8-31.4) and 15.9% (10.4-22.2) of patients, respectively. Enterocele and perineal descent were observed in 16.8% (12.7-21.4) and 44.4% (36.2-52.7) of patients, respectively. Barium defecography detected more intussuscepta than MRID (OR: 1.52 [1.12-2.14]; P = 0.009]). Normative data for both barium defecography and MRID structural and functional parameters were limited, particularly for MRID (only one eligible study).

CONCLUSIONS

Pathological structural abnormalities, as well as functional abnormalities, are common in patients with chronic constipation. Since structural abnormalities cannot be evaluated using nonimaging test modalities (balloon expulsion and anorectal manometry), defecography should be considered the first-line diagnostic test if resources allow.

Adverse obstetric history is not a risk factor for poor outcome after ventral rectopexy for obstructive defaecation syndrome

AIM

Ventral rectopexy (VR) has gained popularity in the management of obstructive defaecation syndrome (ODS) due to a symptomatic rectocele ± intussusception. Data on the efficacy and safety of VR are variable and there are few predictors of successful outcome. This study aimed to examine whether or not an adverse obstetric history influenced the functional outcome following VR for ODS.

METHOD

This was a retrospective study of a cohort of 76 consecutive patients who had undergone VR for ODS at a tertiary referral centre between 2012 and 2015. Patients were followed up by telephone questionnaire. The obstetric history and pre- and postoperative symptoms of ODS and faecal incontinence (FI) were obtained from telephone interviews.

RESULTS

In this cohort, symptoms of ODS were significantly improved by surgery, with 56% of patients showing a reduction of symptoms of 50% or more (P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that a lower body mass index (BMI; 24.4 vs 27.3 kg/m² ; P < 0.05) and shorter duration of symptoms (7 vs 10 years; P < 0.05) led to a better outcome. VR had no effect on FI. Obstetric factors such as foetal weight, instrumental delivery, episiotomy, perineal tear and total number of deliveries did not influence outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Patients with a less straightforward obstetric history can be reassured that this should not adversely influence the functional outcome after VR for ODS. Colorectal surgeons who offer this surgery should warn patients with an elevated BMI or with longstanding symptoms that the operation may be less successful than for those with a lower BMI or shorter duration of symptoms.

Recent advances in understanding and managing chronic constipation

Constipation, a condition characterized by heterogeneous symptoms, is common in Western society. It is associated with reduced physical health, mental health, and social functioning. Because constipation is rarely due to a life-threatening disease (for example, colon cancer), current guidelines recommend empiric therapy. Limited surveys suggest that fewer than half of treated individuals are satisfied with treatment, perhaps because the efficacy of drugs is limited, they are associated with undesirable side effects, or they may not target the underlying pathophysiology. For example, although a substantial proportion of constipated patients have a defecatory disorder that is more appropriately treated with pelvic floor biofeedback therapy than with laxatives, virtually no pharmacological trials formally assessed for anorectal dysfunction. Recent advances in investigational tools have improved our understanding of the physiology and pathophysiology of colonic and defecatory functions. In particular, colonic and anorectal high-resolution manometry are now available. High-resolution anorectal manometry, which is increasingly used in clinical practice, at least in the United States, provides a refined assessment of anorectal pressures and may uncover structural abnormalities. Advances in our understanding of colonic molecular physiology have led to the development of new therapeutic agents (such as secretagogues, pro-kinetics, inhibitors of bile acid transporters and ion exchangers). However, because clinical trials compare these newer agents with placebo, their efficacy relative to traditional laxatives is unknown. This article reviews these physiologic, diagnostic, and therapeutic advances and focuses particularly on newer therapeutic agents.

Evaluation and management of defecatory dysfunction in women

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the current recommendations for the evaluation and management of defecatory dysfunction in women and highlight key relationships between defecatory dysfunction and other pelvic floor disorders, including pelvic organ prolapse, fecal incontinence, and voiding dysfunction.

RECENT FINDINGS

Conservative measures including lifestyle modifications, pharmacotherapy, and biofeedback continue to be the mainstay of treatment with newer therapies emerging. Physiologic testing and/or radiologic imaging should be considered for those who fail conservative therapy or are clinically complex. Surgical management is appropriate for carefully selected patients with anatomic causes of defecatory dysfunction. Further research is needed on surgical outcomes and patient expectations.

SUMMARY

Pelvic floor disorders, including defecatory dysfunction, have a significant societal impact and are highly prevalent among women. Given its potential complexity, a broader focus is needed when evaluating women with defecatory symptoms and effective treatment may require multidisciplinary care.

Expert consensus document: Advances in the evaluation of anorectal function

Faecal incontinence and evacuation disorders are common, impair quality of life and incur substantial economic costs worldwide. As symptoms alone are poor predictors of underlying pathophysiology and aetiology, diagnostic tests of anorectal function could facilitate patient management in those cases that are refractory to conservative therapies. In the past decade, several major technological advances have improved our understanding of anorectal structure, coordination and sensorimotor function. This Consensus Statement provides the reader with an appraisal of the current indications, study performance characteristics, clinical utility, strengths and limitations of the most widely available tests of anorectal structure (ultrasonography and MRI) and function (anorectal manometry, neurophysiological investigations, rectal distension techniques and tests of evacuation, including defecography). Additionally, this article provides our consensus on the clinical relevance of these tests.