Download PDF
Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2014; 27(03): 85-90
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1383901
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Diagnostic Testing for Fecal Incontinence

Craig H. Olson
1   Department of Gastrointestinal and Endocrine Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
24 September 2014 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Many tests are available to assist in the diagnosis and management of fecal incontinence. Imaging studies such as endoanal ultrasonography and defecography provide an anatomic and functional picture of the anal canal which can be useful, especially in the setting of planned sphincter repair. Physiologic tests including anal manometry and anal acoustic reflexometry provide objective data regarding functional values of the anal canal. The value of this information is of some debate; however, as we learn more about these methods, they may prove useful in the future. Finally, nerve studies, such as pudendal motor nerve terminal latency, evaluate the function of the innervation of the anal canal. This has been shown to have significant prognostic value and can help guide clinical decision making. Significant advances have also happened in the field, with the relatively recent advent of magnetic resonance defecography and high-resolution anal manometry, which provide even greater objective anatomic and physiologic information about the anal canal and its function.

Keywords

fecal incontinence - endoanal ultrasonography - anal manometry - pudendal nerve
 

  • References

  • 1 Law PJ, Bartram CI. Anal endosonography: technique and normal anatomy. Gastrointest Radiol 1989; 14 (4) 349-353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Liberman H, Faria J, Ternent CA, Blatchford GJ, Christensen MA, Thorson AG. A prospective evaluation of the value of anorectal physiology in the management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2001; 44 (11) 1567-1574
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Richter HE, Fielding JR, Bradley CS , et al; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Endoanal ultrasound findings and fecal incontinence symptoms in women with and without recognized anal sphincter tears. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108 (6) 1394-1401
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Oom DM, West RL, Schouten WR, Steensma AB. Detection of anal sphincter defects in female patients with fecal incontinence: a comparison of 3-dimensional transperineal ultrasound and 2-dimensional endoanal ultrasound. Dis Colon Rectum 2012; 55 (6) 646-652
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Wijffels NA, Jones OM, Cunningham C, Bemelman WA, Lindsey I. What are the symptoms of internal rectal prolapse?. Colorectal Dis 2013; 15 (3) 368-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Dobben AC, Wiersma TG, Janssen LW , et al. Prospective assessment of interobserver agreement for defecography in fecal incontinence. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 185 (5) 1166-1172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hetzer FH, Andreisek G, Tsagari C, Sahrbacher U, Weishaupt D. MR defecography in patients with fecal incontinence: imaging findings and their effect on surgical management. Radiology 2006; 240 (2) 449-457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Terra MP, Deutekom M, Beets-Tan RG , et al. Relationship between external anal sphincter atrophy at endoanal magnetic resonance imaging and clinical, functional, and anatomic characteristics in patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2006; 49 (5) 668-678
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Raza N, Bielefeldt K. Discriminative value of anorectal manometry in clinical practice. Dig Dis Sci 2009; 54 (11) 2503-2511
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Gearhart S, Hull T, Floruta C, Schroeder T, Hammel J. Anal manometric parameters: predictors of outcome following anal sphincter repair?. J Gastrointest Surg 2005; 9 (1) 115-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Zutshi M, Salcedo L, Hammel J, Hull T. Anal physiology testing in fecal incontinence: is it of any value?. Int J Colorectal Dis 2010; 25 (2) 277-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ratuapli SK, Bharucha AE, Noelting J, Harvey DM, Zinsmeister AR. Phenotypic identification and classification of functional defecatory disorders using high-resolution anorectal manometry. Gastroenterology 2013; 144 (2) 314-322 , e2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Rao SS, Hasler WL. Can high-resolution anorectal manometry shed new light on defecatory disorders?. Gastroenterology 2013; 144 (2) 263-265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Rao SS, Hatfield R, Soffer E, Rao S, Beaty J, Conklin JL. Manometric tests of anorectal function in healthy adults. Am J Gastroenterol 1999; 94 (3) 773-783
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bilali S, Pfeifer J. Anorectal manometry: are fatigue rate and fatigue rate index of any clinical importance?. Tech Coloproctol 2005; 9 (3) 225-228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Jones MP, Post J, Crowell MD. High-resolution manometry in the evaluation of anorectal disorders: a simultaneous comparison with water-perfused manometry. Am J Gastroenterol 2007; 102 (4) 850-855
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Siproudhis L, El Abkari M, El Alaoui M, Juguet F, Bretagne JF. Low rectal volumes in patients suffering from fecal incontinence: what does it mean?. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005; 22 (10) 989-996
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Burgell RE, Bhan C, Lunniss PJ, Scott SM. Fecal incontinence in men: coexistent constipation and impact of rectal hyposensitivity. Dis Colon Rectum 2012; 55 (1) 18-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Guinet A, Verollet D, Deffontaines Rufin S, Sheikh Ismael S, Raibaut P, Amarenco G. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of rectoanal inhibitory reflex (RAIR) modulation in functional bowel disorders. Int J Colorectal Dis 2011; 26 (4) 501-505
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Rao SS, Kavlock R, Rao S. Influence of body position and stool characteristics on defecation in humans. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101 (12) 2790-2796
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Mitchell PJ, Klarskov N, Telford KJ, Hosker GL, Lose G, Kiff ES. Viscoelastic assessment of anal canal function using acoustic reflectometry: a clinically useful technique. Dis Colon Rectum 2012; 55 (2) 211-217
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Mitchell PJ, Klarskov N, Hosker G, Lose G, Kiff ES. Anal acoustic reflectometry: a new technique for assessing anal sphincter function. Colorectal Dis 2010; 12 (7) 692-697
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Yip B, Barrett RC, Coller JA , et al. Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency testing: assessing the educational learning curve: can we teach our own?. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45 (2) 184-187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gilliland R, Altomare DF, Moreira Jr H, Oliveira L, Gilliland JE, Wexner SD. Pudendal neuropathy is predictive of failure following anterior overlapping sphincteroplasty. Dis Colon Rectum 1998; 41 (12) 1516-1522
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ricciardi R, Mellgren AF, Madoff RD, Baxter NN, Karulf RE, Parker SC. The utility of pudendal nerve terminal motor latencies in idiopathic incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 2006; 49 (6) 852-857
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ferrara A, Lujan JH, Cebrian J , et al. Clinical, manometric, and EMG characteristics of patients with fecal incontinence. Tech Coloproctol 2001; 5 (1) 13-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar