Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2020
A new method for assessing anal distensibility with a barostat and magnetic resonance imaging in healthy and constipated women.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Sharma Mayank, Feuerhak Kelly, Corner Stephen M, Manduca Armando, Bharucha Adil E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Defecation requires relaxation of the internal and external anal sphincters. High anal resting pressure is associated with painful constipation, defecatory disorders, and increased healthcare utilization in constipated patients; the mechanisms are unclear. Perhaps patients with a high anal resting pressure have a less distensible canal, which impedes defecation.
METHODS: In 50 of 64 participants (33 healthy and 17 constipated women), anal pressures and distensibility were measured, respectively, with manometry and balloon distention combined with magnetic resonance imaging; rectal balloon expulsion time (BET) was also studied.
RESULTS: The BET (P = .006) was longer, and the mean (SD) rectoanal pressure gradient (-58[40] vs -34[26] mm Hg, P = .03) was more negative in constipated than healthy women; anal resting pressure was not different. During anal distention, the balloon expanded rapidly at an opening pressure of 49 (18) mm Hg, which was lower (P < .0001) than resting pressure (90 [25] mm Hg). The resting pressure was correlated with the opening pressure (r = 0.57, P < .0001) and inversely (r = -0.38, P = .007) with maximum volume but not with anal distensibility (volume-pressure slope). In healthy women, the difference (opening-resting pressure) was correlated with anal relaxation during evacuation (r = 0.35, P = .04). Anal distensibility and sensory thresholds were not different between constipated and healthy women.
CONCLUSIONS: Among healthy and constipated women, a greater anal resting pressure is correlated with greater opening pressure and lower maximum volume during distention, and, hence, provides a surrogate marker of anal distensibility. The difference (opening-resting pressure), which reflects anal relaxation during distention, is correlated with anal relaxation during evacuation. Anal resting pressure and distensibility were comparable in healthy and constipated women.
METHODS: In 50 of 64 participants (33 healthy and 17 constipated women), anal pressures and distensibility were measured, respectively, with manometry and balloon distention combined with magnetic resonance imaging; rectal balloon expulsion time (BET) was also studied.
RESULTS: The BET (P = .006) was longer, and the mean (SD) rectoanal pressure gradient (-58[40] vs -34[26] mm Hg, P = .03) was more negative in constipated than healthy women; anal resting pressure was not different. During anal distention, the balloon expanded rapidly at an opening pressure of 49 (18) mm Hg, which was lower (P < .0001) than resting pressure (90 [25] mm Hg). The resting pressure was correlated with the opening pressure (r = 0.57, P < .0001) and inversely (r = -0.38, P = .007) with maximum volume but not with anal distensibility (volume-pressure slope). In healthy women, the difference (opening-resting pressure) was correlated with anal relaxation during evacuation (r = 0.35, P = .04). Anal distensibility and sensory thresholds were not different between constipated and healthy women.
CONCLUSIONS: Among healthy and constipated women, a greater anal resting pressure is correlated with greater opening pressure and lower maximum volume during distention, and, hence, provides a surrogate marker of anal distensibility. The difference (opening-resting pressure), which reflects anal relaxation during distention, is correlated with anal relaxation during evacuation. Anal resting pressure and distensibility were comparable in healthy and constipated women.