Retrospective evaluation of operator bias in the performance of high-resolution anorectal manometry

Challenges in evaluating pelvic floor physiotherapy based strategies in low anterior resection syndrome: a systematic review and qualitative analysis

AIM

Physiotherapy is an established treatment strategy for low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). However, data on its efficacy are limited. This is in part due to the inherent challenges in study design in this context. This systematic review aims to analyse the methodology of studies using pelvic floor physiotherapy for treatment of LARS to elucidate the challenges and limitations faced, which may inform the design of future prospective trials.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic review of the literature was undertaken through MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library, yielding 345 unique records for screening. Five studies were identified for review. Content thematic analysis of study limitations was carried out using the Braun and Clarke method. Line-by-line coding was used to organize implicit and explicit challenges and limitations under broad organizing categories.

RESULTS

Key challenges fell into five overarching categories: patient-related issues, cancer-related issues, adequate symptomatic control, intervention-related issues and measurement of outcomes. Adherence, attrition and randomization contributed to potential bias within these studies, with imbalance in the baseline patient characteristics, particularly gender and baseline pelvic floor function scores. Outcome measurements consisted of patient-reported measures and quality of life measures, where significant improvements in bowel function according to patient-reported outcome measures were not reflected in the quality of life scores.

CONCLUSION

Upcoming trial design in the area of pelvic floor physiotherapy for faecal incontinence related to rectal cancer surgery can be cognisant of and design around the challenges identified in this systematic review, including the reduction of bias, exclusion of the placebo effect and the potential cultural differences in attitude towards a sensitive intervention.

Study on 3D High-Resolution Anorectal Manometry Interrater Agreement in the Evaluation of Dyssynergic Defecation Disorders

Anorectal manometry measurements exhibit significant interrater variability. Newer techniques like 3D high-resolution anorectal manometry (3D-HRAM) have the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and our understanding of defecation disorders. However, the extent of interrater variability in 3D-HRAM is still unknown. Between January 2020 to April 2022, patients referred for pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) due to functional defecation complaints underwent 3D-HRAM testing. In a retrospective analysis, three expert raters independently evaluated the 3D-HRAM results in a blinded matter to assess interrater agreement. The evaluation also determined the level of agreement concerning dyssynergic patterns during simulated defecation. The 3D-HRAM results of 50 patients (37 females) were included. Twenty-nine patients had complaints of fecal incontinence, eleven patients had chronic constipation, and ten patients had several other complaints. There was a substantial agreement (kappa 0.612) between the raters concerning the 3D images on dyssynergic patterns during simulated defecation. Our study emphasizes the need for standardized guidelines in evaluating 3D-HRAM test results to reduce subjectivity and further improve agreement among raters. Implementing these guidelines could improve diagnostic consistency and enhance personalized treatment strategies, increasing the reliability and usefulness of 3D-HRAM testing in clinical practice.

To what extent are anorectal function tests comparable? A study comparing digital rectal examination, anal electromyography, 3-dimensional high-resolution anal manometry, and transperineal ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Anorectal function tests are helpful for objective investigation of anorectal (dys)function. A variety of tests are available, but there is no recommendation when to perform which test. Furthermore, which test is the most accurate is controversial and the correlation between these tests is not very clear. The aim of our study was to examine the correlation of anal pressures and the possibility to diagnose pelvic floor dyssynergia between digital rectal examination (DRE) and several anorectal function tests.

METHODS

Between January 2020 and April 2022, all men and women aged 18 to 80 years, treated at the Proctos Clinic, who were referred for pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) by the surgeon and underwent anorectal function tests, were included. DRE was performed to establish the anal pressure at rest and during squeeze and straining. Anorectal function tests included 3D high-resolution anal manometry (3D-HRAM), balloon expulsion test (BET), transperineal ultrasound (TPUS), and surface electromyography (s-EMG).

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients, 37 (74%) females, were included. Median age was 51 years. Twenty-three (62%) females had a history of two or more vaginal deliveries. The most frequent reason for referral for PFPT was fecal incontinence in 27 (54%) patients. The assessed pressures and pelvic floor function measured with DRE by the surgeon and the pelvic floor physical therapist during rest, squeeze, and straining correlated in 78%, 78%, and 84%, respectively. Correlation between DRE and 3D-HRAM or s-EMG was better for squeeze pressures than resting pressures. The correlation between s-EMG and 3D-HRAM was better during squeeze than at rest with an agreement of 59% and 37%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

DRE by an experienced investigator is of sufficient value for daily clinical practice to detect dyssynergia and to measure sphincter tone. Commonly performed anorectal function tests correlate poorly with DRE and with other anorectal function tests. When conservative treatment fails, further investigation is warranted; however, these results should be interpreted with caution. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD TO THE LITERATURE?: Anorectal function tests such as the 3D high-resolution anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion test, surface electromyography, and transperineal ultrasound are all frequently performed in the diagnostic workup in patients with defecation disorders. No previous study has compared these tests regarding their outcomes, nor has the interrater agreement been measured regarding the digital rectal examination by two experienced observers. Furthermore, transperineal ultrasound is in all probability not frequently used and therefore underexposed in the diagnostic workup of patients with dyssynergic defecation.

Reproducibility of high-resolution manometry among healthy and constipated persons

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although high-resolution manometry (HR_ARM) is commonly used to diagnose defecatory disorders, its intraindividual day-to-day reproducibility is unknown. Since these measurements entail voluntary effort, this study aimed to evaluate the intraindividual day-to-day reproducibility of HR_ARM.

METHODS

In 22 healthy women (35 years [14] mean [SD]) and 53 constipated patients (42 years [13], 46 women), the rectal balloon expulsion time (BET), and anorectal pressures were measured with HR_ARM on 2 days separated by a median (interquartile range) of 15 days (11-53) in healthy and 40 days (8-75) in constipated patients. Anorectal pressures were evaluated at rest (20 s), during squeeze, and during evacuation. Rectal sensation was also evaluated in constipated patients. The agreement between both measurements was evaluated with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and other tests.

RESULTS

Among constipated patients, the anal resting (mean CCC [95%CI] 0.62 [0.43-0.76]) and squeeze pressures (CCC 0.65 [0.47-0.79]), rectoanal gradient during evacuation (CCC 0.42 [0.17-0.62]), and rectal sensory thresholds (CCC for urgency 0.72 [0.52-0.84]) were concordant. Between days 1 and 2, one or more outcomes, characterized as normal or abnormal, differed in 79% of constipated patients, i.e., anal resting and squeeze pressures, the gradient, and the rectal BET differed in, respectively, 25%, 19%, 36%, and 10% of constipated patients. The rectal BET was prolonged in three healthy persons (both days) and either on 1 day (six patients) or 2 days (33 patients) in constipated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

While HR_ARM variables and the BET are reproducible within healthy and constipated persons, the outcome on repeat testing differed in 79% of constipated patients.