Semi-automated vectorial analysis of anorectal motion by magnetic resonance defecography in healthy subjects and fecal incontinence

Comparison of Anorectal Manometry, Rectal Balloon Expulsion Test, and Defecography for Diagnosing Defecatory Disorders

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The utility of high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) for diagnosing defecatory disorders (DDs) is unclear because healthy people may have features of dyssynergia. We aimed to identify objective diagnostic criteria for DD and to ascertain the utility of HR-ARM for diagnosing DD.

METHODS

Constipated patients were assessed with HR-ARM and rectal balloon expulsion time (BET), and a subset underwent defecography. Normal values were established by assessing 184 sex-matched healthy individuals. Logistic regression models evaluated the association of abnormal HR-ARM findings with prolonged BET and reduced rectal evacuation (determined by defecography).

RESULTS

A total of 474 constipated individuals (420 women) underwent HR-ARM and BET, and 158 underwent defecography. BET was prolonged, suggesting a DD, for 152 patients (32%). Rectal evacuation was lower for patients with prolonged vs normal BET. A lower rectoanal gradient during evacuation, reduced anal squeeze increment, and reduced rectal sensation were independently associated with abnormal BETs; the rectoanal gradient was 36% sensitive and 85% specific for prolonged BET. A lower rectoanal gradient and prolonged BET were independently associated with reduced evacuation. Among constipated patients, the probability of reduced rectal evacuation was 14% when the gradient and BET were both normal, 45% when either was abnormal, and 75% when both variables were abnormal.

CONCLUSIONS

HR-ARM, BET, and defecography findings were concordant for constipated patients, and reduced rectoanal gradient was the best HR-ARM predictor of prolonged BET or reduced rectal evacuation. Prolonged BET, reduced gradient, and reduced evacuation each independently supported a diagnosis of DD in constipated patients. We propose the terms probable DD for patients with an isolated abnormal gradient or BET and definite DD for patients with abnormal results from both tests.

Faecal incontinence in adults

Faecal incontinence, which is defined by the unintentional loss of solid or liquid stool, has a worldwide prevalence of ≤7% in community-dwelling adults and can markedly impair quality of life. Nonetheless, many patients might not volunteer the symptom owing to embarrassment. Bowel disturbances, particularly diarrhoea, anal sphincter trauma (obstetrical injury or previous surgery), rectal urgency and burden of chronic illness are the main risk factors for faecal incontinence; others include neurological disorders, inflammatory bowel disease and pelvic floor anatomical disturbances. Faecal incontinence is classified by its type (urge, passive or combined), aetiology (anorectal disturbance, bowel symptoms or both) and severity, which is derived from the frequency, volume, consistency and nature (urge or passive) of stool leakage. Guided by the clinical features, diagnostic tests and therapies are implemented stepwise. When simple measures (for example, bowel modifiers such as fibre supplements, laxatives and anti-diarrhoeal agents) fail, anorectal manometry and other tests (endoanal imaging, defecography, rectal compliance and sensation, and anal neurophysiological tests) are performed as necessary. Non-surgical options (diet and lifestyle modification, behavioural measures, including biofeedback therapy, pharmacotherapy for constipation or diarrhoea, and anal or vaginal barrier devices) are often effective, especially in patients with mild faecal incontinence. Thereafter, perianal bulking agents, sacral neuromodulation and other surgeries may be considered when necessary.

Inadequate Rectal Pressure and Insufficient Relaxation and Abdominopelvic Coordination in Defecatory Disorders

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Diagnostic tests for defecatory disorders (DDs) asynchronously measure anorectal pressures and evacuation and show limited agreement; thus, abdominopelvic-rectoanal coordination in normal defecation and DDs is poorly characterized. We aimed to investigate anorectal pressures, anorectal and abdominal motion, and evacuation simultaneously in healthy and constipated women.

METHODS

Abdominal wall and anorectal motion, anorectal pressures, and rectal evacuation were measured simultaneously with supine magnetic resonance defecography and anorectal manometry. Evacuators were defined as those who attained at least 25% rectal evacuation. Supervised (logistic regression and random forest algorithm) and unsupervised (k-means cluster) analyses identified abdominal and anorectal variables that predicted evacuation.

RESULTS

We evaluated 28 healthy and 26 constipated women (evacuators comprised 19 healthy participants and 8 patients). Defecation was initiated by abdominal wall expansion that was coordinated with anorectal descent, increased rectal and anal pressure, and then anal relaxation and rectal evacuation. Compared with evacuators, nonevacuators had lower anal diameters during simulated defecation, rectal pressure, anorectal junction descent, and abdominopelvic-rectoanal coordination (P < .05). Unsupervised cluster analysis identified 3 clusters that were associated with evacuator status (P < .01), that is, 10 evacuators (83%), 16 evacuators (73%), and 1 evacuator (5%) in clusters 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Each cluster had distinct characteristics (eg, maximum abdominosacral distance, rectal pressure, anorectal junction descent, anal diameter) and correlates that were more (clusters 1-2) or less (cluster 3) conducive to evacuation. Cluster 2 had 16 evacuators (73%) and intermediate characteristics (eg, lower anal resting pressure and relaxation during evacuation; P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with DDs and a modest proportion of healthy women had specific patterns of anorectal dysfunction, including inadequate rectal pressurization, anal relaxation, and abdominopelvic-rectoanal coordination. These observations may guide individualized therapy for DDs in the future.

Diagnostic Strategy and Tools for Identifying Defecatory Disorders

This article reviews the indications, techniques, interpretation, strengths, and weaknesses of tests (anal manometry, anal surface electromyography, rectal balloon expulsion test, barium and MRI defecography, assessment of rectal compliance and sensation, and colonic transit) that are used diagnose defecatory disorders in constipated patients. The selection of tests and the sequence in which they are performed should be individualized to and interpreted in the context of the clinical features. Because anorectal functions are affected by age, results should be interpreted with reference to age- and sex-matched normal values for the same technique.

ACG Clinical Guidelines: Management of Benign Anorectal Disorders

Benign anorectal disorders of structure and function are common in clinical practice. These guidelines summarize the preferred approach to the evaluation and management of defecation disorders, proctalgia syndromes, hemorrhoids, anal fissures, and fecal incontinence in adults and represent the official practice recommendations of the American College of Gastroenterology. The scientific evidence for these guidelines was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process. When the evidence was not appropriate for Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation, we used expert consensus to develop key concept statements. These guidelines should be considered as preferred but are not the only approaches to these conditions.

Mechanisms, Evaluation, and Management of Chronic Constipation

With a worldwide prevalence of 15%, chronic constipation is one of the most frequent gastrointestinal diagnoses made in ambulatory medicine clinics, and is a common source cause for referrals to gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons in the United States. Symptoms vary among patients; straining, incomplete evacuation, and a sense of anorectal blockage are just as important as decreased stool frequency. Chronic constipation is either a primary disorder (such as normal transit, slow transit, or defecatory disorders) or a secondary one (due to medications or, in rare cases, anatomic alterations). Colonic sensorimotor disturbances and pelvic floor dysfunction (such as defecatory disorders) are the most widely recognized pathogenic mechanisms. Guided by efficacy and cost, management of constipation should begin with dietary fiber supplementation and stimulant and/or osmotic laxatives, as appropriate, followed, if necessary, by intestinal secretagogues and/or prokinetic agents. Peripherally acting μ-opiate antagonists are another option for opioid-induced constipation. Anorectal tests to evaluate for defecatory disorders should be performed in patients who do not respond to over-the-counter agents. Colonic transit, followed if necessary with assessment of colonic motility with manometry and/or a barostat, can identify colonic dysmotility. Defecatory disorders often respond to biofeedback therapy. For specific patients, slow-transit constipation may necessitate a colectomy. No studies have compared inexpensive laxatives with newer drugs with different mechanisms. We review the mechanisms, evaluation, and management of chronic constipation. We discuss the importance of meticulous analyses of patient history and physical examination, advantages and disadvantages of diagnostic testing, guidance for individualized treatment, and management of medically refractory patients.

Chronic Constipation

Constipation is a common symptom that may be primary (idiopathic or functional) or associated with a number of disorders or medications. Although most constipation is self-managed by patients, 22% seek health care, mostly to primary care physicians (>50%) and gastroenterologists (14%), resulting in large expenditures for diagnostic testing and treatments. There is strong evidence that stimulant and osmotic laxatives, intestinal secretagogues, and peripherally restricted μ-opiate antagonists are effective and safe; the lattermost drugs are a major advance for managing opioid-induced constipation. Constipation that is refractory to available laxatives should be evaluated for defecatory disorders and slow-transit constipation using studies of anorectal function and colonic transit. Defecatory disorders are often responsive to biofeedback therapies, whereas slow-transit constipation may require surgical intervention in selected patients. Both efficacy and cost should guide the choice of treatment for functional constipation and opiate-induced constipation. Currently, no studies have compared inexpensive laxatives with newer drugs that work by other mechanisms.

Comparison of changes in rectal area and volume during MR evacuation proctography in healthy and constipated adults

BACKGROUND

During proctography, rectal emptying is visually estimated by the reduction in rectal area. The correlation between changes in rectal area, which is a surrogate measure of volume, is unclear. Our aims were to compare the change in rectal area and volume during magnetic resonance (MR) proctography and to compare these parameters with rectal balloon expulsion time (BET).

METHODS

In 49 healthy and 46 constipated participants, we measured BET and rectal area and volume with a software program before and after participants expelled rectal gel during proctography.

KEY RESULTS

All participants completed both tests; six healthy and 17 constipated patients had a prolonged (>60 seconds) BET. During evacuation, the reduction in rectal area and volume was lower in participants with an abnormal than a normal BET (P < 0.01). The reduction in rectal area and volume were strongly correlated (r = 0.93, P < 0.001) and equivalent for identifying participants with abnormal BET. Among participants with less evacuation, the reduction in rectal area underestimated the reduction in rectal volume. A rectocele larger than 2 cm was observed in eight of 18 (44%) participants in whom the difference between change in volume and area was ˃10% but only 14 of 77 (18%) participants in whom the difference was ≤10% (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Measured with MR proctography, the rectal area is reasonably accurate for quantifying rectal emptying and equivalent to rectal volume for distinguishing between normal and abnormal BET. When evacuation is reduced, the change in rectal area may underestimate the change in rectal volume.

Will MRI of gastrointestinal function parallel the clinical success of cine cardiac MRI?

Cine cardiac MRI is generally accepted as the "gold-standard" for functional myocardial assessment. It only took a few years after the development of commercial MRI systems for functional cardiac imaging to be developed, with electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated cine imaging first reported in 1988. The function of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is more complex to study compared to the heart. However, the idea of having a non-invasive tool to study the GI function that also allows the concurrent assessment of different aspects of this function has become more and more attractive in the gastroenterological field. This review summarises key literature of the last 5 years to describe the current status of MRI in respect to the evaluation of GI function, highlighting the gaps and challenges and the future prospects. As the clinical application of a new technique requires that its clinical utility is confirmed by demonstration of its ability to enable clinicians to make a diagnosis and/or predict the treatment response, this review also considers whether or not this has been achieved, and how MRI has been validated against techniques currently recognised as the gold standard in clinical practice.

Normal values for assessment of anal sphincter morphology, anorectal motion, and pelvic organ prolapse with MRI in healthy women

BACKGROUND

Endoanal MRI and MR defecography are used to identify anal sphincter injury and disordered defecation. However, few studies have evaluated findings in asymptomatic healthy people. The effects of BMI and parity on rectoanal motion and evacuation are unknown.

METHODS

In 113 asymptomatic females (age 50 ± 17 years, Mean ± SD) without risk factors for anorectal trauma, anal sphincter appearance, anorectal motion, and pelvic organ prolapse were evaluated with MRI. The relationship between age, BMI, and parity and structural findings were evaluated with parametric and non-parametric tests.

RESULTS

The anal sphincters and puborectalis appeared normal in over 90% of women. During dynamic MRI, the anorectal angle was 100 ± 1º (Mean ± SEM) at rest, 70 ± 2° at squeeze, and 120 ± 2° during defecation. The change in anorectal angle during squeeze (r = -.25, P < .005), but not during evacuation (r = .13, P = .25) was associated with age. In the multivariable models, BMI (P < .01) and parity (P < .01) were, respectively, independently associated with the intersubject variation in the anorectal angle at rest and the angle change during squeeze. Ten percent or fewer women had had descent of the bladder base or uterus 4 cm or more below the pubococcygeal line or a rectocele measuring 4 cm or larger. Only 5% had a patulous anal canal.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to age, BMI and parity also affect anorectal motion in asymptomatic women. These findings provide age-adjusted normal values for rectoanal anatomy and pelvic floor motion.

Magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate gastrointestinal function

Magnetic resonance imaging of gastrointestinal (GI) function has advanced substantially in the last few years. The ability to obtain high resolution images of the undisturbed bowel with tunable tissue contrast and using no ionizing radiation are clear advantages, particularly for children and women of reproductive age. Barriers to diffusion in clinical practice so far include the need to demonstrate clinical value and the burden of data processing. Both difficulties are being addressed and the technique is providing novel insights into both upper and lower GI disorders of function at an ever increasing rate.

Quantification and variability in colonic volume with a novel magnetic resonance imaging method

BACKGROUND

Segmental distribution of colorectal volume is relevant in a number of diseases, but clinical and experimental use demands robust reliability and validity. Using a novel semi-automatic magnetic resonance imaging-based technique, the aims of this study were to describe: (i) inter-individual and intra-individual variability of segmental colorectal volumes between two observations in healthy subjects and (ii) the change in segmental colorectal volume distribution before and after defecation.

METHODS

The inter-individual and intra-individual variability of four colorectal volumes (cecum/ascending colon, transverse, descending, and rectosigmoid colon) between two observations (separated by 52 ± 10) days was assessed in 25 healthy males and the effect of defecation on segmental colorectal volumes was studied in another seven healthy males.

KEY RESULTS

No significant differences between the two observations were detected for any segments (All p > 0.05). Inter-individual variability varied across segments from low correlation in cecum/ascending colon (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.44) to moderate correlation in the descending colon (ICC = 0.61) and high correlation in the transverse (ICC = 0.78), rectosigmoid (ICC = 0.82), and total volume (ICC = 0.85). Overall intra-individual variability was low (coefficient of variance = 9%). After defecation the volume of the rectosigmoid decreased by 44% (p = 0.003). The change in rectosigmoid volume was associated with the true fecal volume (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

Imaging of segmental colorectal volume, morphology, and fecal accumulation is advantageous to conventional methods in its low variability, high spatial resolution, and its absence of contrast-enhancing agents and irradiation. Hence, the method is suitable for future clinical and interventional studies and for characterization of defecation physiology.

Relationship Among Anal Sphincter Injury, Patulous Anal Canal, and Anal Pressures in Patients With Anorectal Disorders

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The anal sphincters and puborectalis are imaged routinely with an endoanal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) coil, which does not assess co-aptation of the anal canal at rest. By using a MRI torso coil, we identified a patulous anal canal in some patients with anorectal disorders. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between anal sphincter and puborectalis injury, a patulous anal canal, and anal pressures.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 119 patients who underwent MRI and manometry analysis of anal anatomy and pressures, respectively, from February 2011 through March 2013 at the Mayo Clinic. Anal pressures were determined by high-resolution manometry, anal sphincter and puborectalis injury was determined by endoanal MRI, and anal canal integrity was determined by torso MRI. Associations between manometric and anatomic parameters were evaluated with univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Fecal incontinence (55 patients; 46%) and constipation (36 patients; 30%) were the main indications for testing; 49 patients (41%) had a patulous anal canal, which was associated with injury to more than 1 muscle (all P ≤ .001), and internal sphincter (P < .01), but not puborectalis (P = .09) or external sphincter (P = .06), injury. Internal (P < .01) and external sphincter injury (P = .02) and a patulous canal (P < .001), but not puborectalis injury, predicted anal resting pressure. A patulous anal canal was the only significant predictor (P < .01) of the anal squeeze pressure increment.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with anorectal disorders commonly have a patulous anal canal, which is associated with more severe anal injury and independently predicted anal resting pressure and squeeze pressure increment. It therefore is important to identify a patulous anal canal because it appears to be a marker of not only anal sphincter injury but disturbances beyond sphincter injury, such as damage to the anal cushions or anal denervation.

Comparison of rectal balloon expulsion test in seated and left lateral positions

BACKGROUND

Defecatory disorders can be diagnosed by rectal balloon expulsion (BE) and anorectal manometry, which are traditionally evaluated in the seated and left lateral (LL) positions, respectively. The aims of this study were to compare BE in the LL and seated positions and to compare anorectal manometric parameters to BE performed in the seated and LL positions.

METHODS

220 women [healthy (62), chronic constipation (158)] had anorectal high-resolution manometry and BE, summarized by time required (seated position, normal ≤60 s) or external traction to facilitate expulsion (LL position, normal ≤100 g).

KEY RESULTS

Balloon expulsion results in both positions were either concordant [normal (141) or abnormal (32)] or discordant [only LL abnormal (30), only seated abnormal (17)]. There was modest agreement [κ = 0.44 (95% CI 0.30-0.57)] between seated and LL BE. Compared with subjects with normal BE in both positions, anal pressure during simulated evacuation (SE) was higher, and the rectoanal gradient (rectal-anal pressure) during SE was more negative in the other 3 categories (i.e., abnormal LL only, abnormal seated only, and both abnormal). High anal pressure during SE (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.04) and high rectal sensory threshold for desire to defecate (OR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02) were associated with increased risk of abnormal BE in both positions, whereas high rectal pressure during SE (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.98) was associated with lower risk.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

There is modest agreement between rectal BE in LL and seated positions. In addition to abnormal seated BE, which is considered indicative of pelvic floor dysfunction, high resolution manometry findings suggest that even some patients with abnormal BE in the LL position have pelvic floor dysfunction.