Investigation of the utility of colorectal function tests and Rome II criteria in dyssynergic defecation (Anismus)

Satish Sanku Chander Rao, R. S. Mudipalli, M. Stessman, B. Zimmerman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

163 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although 30-50% of constipated patients exhibit dyssynergia, an optimal method of diagnosis is unclear. Recently, consensus criteria have been proposed but their utility is unknown. To examine the diagnostic yield of colorectal tests, reproducibility of manometry and utility of Rome II criteria. A total of 100 patients with difficult defecation were prospectively evaluated with anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion, colonic transit and defecography. Fifty-three patients had repeat manometry. During attempted defecation, 30 showed normal and 70 one of three abnormal manometric patterns. Forty-six patients fulfilled Rome criteria and showed paradoxical anal contraction (type I) or impaired anal relaxation (type III) with adequate propulsion. However, 24 (34%) showed impaired propulsion (type II). Forty-five (64%) had slow transit, 42 (60%) impaired balloon expulsion and 26 (37%) abnormal defecography. Defecography provided no additional discriminant utility. Evidence of dyssynergia was reproducible in 51 of 53 patients. Symptoms alone could not differentiate dyssynergic subtypes or patients. Dyssynergic patients exhibited three patterns that were reproducible: paradoxical contraction, impaired propulsion and impaired relaxation. Although useful, Rome II criteria may be insufficient to identify or subclassify dyssynergic defecation. Symptoms together with abnormal manometry, abnormal balloon expulsion or colonic marker retention are necessary to optimally identify patients with difficult defecation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)589-596
Number of pages8
JournalNeurogastroenterology and Motility
Volume16
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2004
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Defecation
Defecography
Manometry
Ataxia

Keywords

  • Anorectal function
  • Anorectal manometry
  • Constipation
  • Diagnosis
  • Dyssynergia
  • Rome II

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Endocrine and Autonomic Systems
  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Investigation of the utility of colorectal function tests and Rome II criteria in dyssynergic defecation (Anismus). / Rao, Satish Sanku Chander; Mudipalli, R. S.; Stessman, M.; Zimmerman, B.

In: Neurogastroenterology and Motility, Vol. 16, No. 5, 01.10.2004, p. 589-596.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{38271c1801aa480f80b7f0e793385fb9,
title = "Investigation of the utility of colorectal function tests and Rome II criteria in dyssynergic defecation (Anismus)",
abstract = "Although 30-50{\%} of constipated patients exhibit dyssynergia, an optimal method of diagnosis is unclear. Recently, consensus criteria have been proposed but their utility is unknown. To examine the diagnostic yield of colorectal tests, reproducibility of manometry and utility of Rome II criteria. A total of 100 patients with difficult defecation were prospectively evaluated with anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion, colonic transit and defecography. Fifty-three patients had repeat manometry. During attempted defecation, 30 showed normal and 70 one of three abnormal manometric patterns. Forty-six patients fulfilled Rome criteria and showed paradoxical anal contraction (type I) or impaired anal relaxation (type III) with adequate propulsion. However, 24 (34{\%}) showed impaired propulsion (type II). Forty-five (64{\%}) had slow transit, 42 (60{\%}) impaired balloon expulsion and 26 (37{\%}) abnormal defecography. Defecography provided no additional discriminant utility. Evidence of dyssynergia was reproducible in 51 of 53 patients. Symptoms alone could not differentiate dyssynergic subtypes or patients. Dyssynergic patients exhibited three patterns that were reproducible: paradoxical contraction, impaired propulsion and impaired relaxation. Although useful, Rome II criteria may be insufficient to identify or subclassify dyssynergic defecation. Symptoms together with abnormal manometry, abnormal balloon expulsion or colonic marker retention are necessary to optimally identify patients with difficult defecation.",
keywords = "Anorectal function, Anorectal manometry, Constipation, Diagnosis, Dyssynergia, Rome II",
author = "Rao, {Satish Sanku Chander} and Mudipalli, {R. S.} and M. Stessman and B. Zimmerman",
year = "2004",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2982.2004.00526.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "589--596",
journal = "Neurogastroenterology and Motility",
issn = "1350-1925",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Investigation of the utility of colorectal function tests and Rome II criteria in dyssynergic defecation (Anismus)

AU - Rao, Satish Sanku Chander

AU - Mudipalli, R. S.

AU - Stessman, M.

AU - Zimmerman, B.

PY - 2004/10/1

Y1 - 2004/10/1

N2 - Although 30-50% of constipated patients exhibit dyssynergia, an optimal method of diagnosis is unclear. Recently, consensus criteria have been proposed but their utility is unknown. To examine the diagnostic yield of colorectal tests, reproducibility of manometry and utility of Rome II criteria. A total of 100 patients with difficult defecation were prospectively evaluated with anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion, colonic transit and defecography. Fifty-three patients had repeat manometry. During attempted defecation, 30 showed normal and 70 one of three abnormal manometric patterns. Forty-six patients fulfilled Rome criteria and showed paradoxical anal contraction (type I) or impaired anal relaxation (type III) with adequate propulsion. However, 24 (34%) showed impaired propulsion (type II). Forty-five (64%) had slow transit, 42 (60%) impaired balloon expulsion and 26 (37%) abnormal defecography. Defecography provided no additional discriminant utility. Evidence of dyssynergia was reproducible in 51 of 53 patients. Symptoms alone could not differentiate dyssynergic subtypes or patients. Dyssynergic patients exhibited three patterns that were reproducible: paradoxical contraction, impaired propulsion and impaired relaxation. Although useful, Rome II criteria may be insufficient to identify or subclassify dyssynergic defecation. Symptoms together with abnormal manometry, abnormal balloon expulsion or colonic marker retention are necessary to optimally identify patients with difficult defecation.

AB - Although 30-50% of constipated patients exhibit dyssynergia, an optimal method of diagnosis is unclear. Recently, consensus criteria have been proposed but their utility is unknown. To examine the diagnostic yield of colorectal tests, reproducibility of manometry and utility of Rome II criteria. A total of 100 patients with difficult defecation were prospectively evaluated with anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion, colonic transit and defecography. Fifty-three patients had repeat manometry. During attempted defecation, 30 showed normal and 70 one of three abnormal manometric patterns. Forty-six patients fulfilled Rome criteria and showed paradoxical anal contraction (type I) or impaired anal relaxation (type III) with adequate propulsion. However, 24 (34%) showed impaired propulsion (type II). Forty-five (64%) had slow transit, 42 (60%) impaired balloon expulsion and 26 (37%) abnormal defecography. Defecography provided no additional discriminant utility. Evidence of dyssynergia was reproducible in 51 of 53 patients. Symptoms alone could not differentiate dyssynergic subtypes or patients. Dyssynergic patients exhibited three patterns that were reproducible: paradoxical contraction, impaired propulsion and impaired relaxation. Although useful, Rome II criteria may be insufficient to identify or subclassify dyssynergic defecation. Symptoms together with abnormal manometry, abnormal balloon expulsion or colonic marker retention are necessary to optimally identify patients with difficult defecation.

KW - Anorectal function

KW - Anorectal manometry

KW - Constipation

KW - Diagnosis

KW - Dyssynergia

KW - Rome II

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=8144225097&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=8144225097&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2982.2004.00526.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2982.2004.00526.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 15500515

AN - SCOPUS:8144225097

VL - 16

SP - 589

EP - 596

JO - Neurogastroenterology and Motility

JF - Neurogastroenterology and Motility

SN - 1350-1925

IS - 5

ER -