THE RESULTS OF HIGH-RESOLUTION ANORECTAL MANOMETRY AND DYNAMIC PELVIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING ON PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC FUNCTIONAL CONSTIPATION

Tín Nguyễn Trung, Vinh Ngô Thế, Nghĩa Lưu Hiếu, Minh Nguyễn Đức

Main Article Content

Abstract

Introduction: Dynamic pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (DP-MRI) and high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) are diagnostic methodologies for chronic functional constipation. The aim of this study is to determine whether high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) correlates with findings on DP-MRI. Methods: This research is a retrospective study of HR-ARM performed on patients with constipation caused by rectocele, who also underwent DP-MRI. Studies were reviewed for the parameters of HR-ARM and significant findings of DP-MRI including posterior pelvic prolapse ≥ 6cm and rectocele ≥ 3 cm. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson’s correlation coefficients to find out the correlation between parameters of HD-MRI with the descending of posterior pelvic floor and size of rectocele. Results: Sixty-three female patients (median age 49, range 18 – 78 years) with functional chronic constipation undergoing HR-ARM also underwent DP-MRI. The median of rectocele size was 3,2 cm (range, 0cm – 5,6cm). The median of descending of posterior pelvic floor was 4,7 cm (range, 1,2 – 8,3cm). The analysis found out the significant correlation between size of rectocele with anal pressure (r = - 0,29; p = 0,019) and rectal pressure (r= - 0,27; p = 0,034) at straining. The correlations between pelvic floor descending with anal pressure (r = -0,40; p = 0,001) and rectal pressure at straining (r = - 0,41; p = 0,001) were also significant. Conclusions: There were significantly negative correlation between the intrarectal pressure and anal pressure at straining and rectocele size. There were sigificantly negative correlations between the prolapse of pelvic floor and straining anal pressure or straining anal pressure as well.

Article Details

References

1. Bharucha AE, Fletcher JG, Seide B, Riederer SJ, Zinsmeister AR. Phenotypic variation in functional disorders of defecation. Gastroenterology, 2005, 128: 1199–1210. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2005.03.021
2. Bharucha AE, Wald AM. Anorectal disorders. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 2010, 105: 786–794. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.70
3. Bordeianou LG, Carmichael JC, Paquette IM, et al. Consensus statement of definitions for anorectal physiology testing and pelvic floor terminology (revised). Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, 2018, 61(4): 421–427. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001070
4. Goh V, Halligan S, Kaplan G, Healy J, Bartram CI. Dynamic MR imaging of the pelvic floor in asymptomatic subjects. American Journal of Roentgenology, 2000, 174: 661–666. doi: 10.2214/ajr.174.3.1740661
5. Jodorkovsky D, Macura KJ, Gearhart SL, et al. High-resolution anorectal manometry and dynamic pelvic magnetic resonance imaging are complementary technologies. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2015, 30(1): 71–74. doi: 10.1111/jgh.12697
6. Kruyt RH, Delemarre JB, Doornbos J, Vogel HJ. Normal anorectum: dynamic MR imaging anatomy. Radiology, 1991, 179: 159–163. doi: 10.1148/radiology.179.1.2006269
7. Zhao Y, Ren X, Qiao W, et al. High-resolution anorectal manometry in the diagnosis of functional defecation disorder in patients with functional constipation: a retrospective cohort study. Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, 2019, 25(2): 250. doi: 10.5056/ jnm18032