La Radiologia medica · 1994
[Functional ano-rectal disorders: associated defecographic findings and related symptoms].
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Grassi R, Catalano O, Salzano A, Amitrano M, Parisi B, Rotondo A
Аннотация
We retrospectively analyzed our latest 564 defecographies to evaluate: the frequency of each single defecographic finding on the total number of patients and in the two sexes; the frequency of the finding as single disorder and in association with other anorectal disorders; the correlation between findings and symptoms. The most common disorders were anterior rectocele (54%), mucosal prolapse (53%), puborectalis muscle syndrome (15%), and intussusception (15%); this order is respected in women (70, 57, 17 and 16% of the study population) but differs in men (mucosal prolapse 42%, puborectalis muscle syndrome 18%, posterior rectocele 14%, and intussusception 14%). Intussusception and puborectalis muscle syndrome were identified as an isolated finding in many cases (55% and 43%, respectively). The most common associations are: posterior rectocele with anterior rectocele (58% of cases), anterior rectocele with mucosal prolapse and vice versa (63% and 64%), intussusception with anterior rectocele (52%), puborectalis muscle syndrome with mucosal prolapse (36%) and with anterior rectocele (49%) and descending perineum syndrome with anterior rectocele (81%) and with mucosal prolapse (70%). The low rate of association among some disorders should be mentioned too for example, mucosal prolapse is associated, with intussusception only in 10% of cases. Clinical-defecographic correlations are less apparent: if some symptoms are found to be more typical of some disorders, this correlation is not pathognomonic and the clinical picture is quite aspecific. We stress the value of a careful correlation between clinical-anamnestic and defecographic findings for the correct evaluation of these disorders.