Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Ann Coloproctol : Annals of Coloproctology

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Page Path
HOME > Browse Articles
Search
Ahsin Jawad 1 Article
Anismus, Physiology, Radiology: Is It Time for Some Pragmatism? A Comparative Study of Radiological and Anorectal Physiology Findings in Patients With Anismus
Umberto Pisano, Lesley Irvine, Justina Szczachor, Ahsin Jawad, Andrew MacLeod, Michael Lim
Ann Coloproctol. 2016;32(5):170-174.   Published online October 31, 2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2016.32.5.170
  • 4,297 View
  • 70 Download
  • 3 Web of Science
  • 7 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose

Anismus is a functional disorder featuring obstructive symptoms and paradoxical contractions of the pelvic floor. This study aims to establish diagnosis agreement between physiology and radiology, associate anismus with morphological outlet obstruction, and explore the role of sphincteric pressure and rectal volumes in the radiological diagnosis of anismus.

Methods

Consecutive patients were evaluated by using magnetic resonance imaging proctography/fluoroscopic defecography and anorectal physiology. Morphological radiological features were associated with physiology tests. A categorical analysis was performed using the chi-square test, and agreement was assessed via the kappa coefficient. A Mann-Whitney test was used to assess rectal volumes and sphincterial pressure distributions between groups of patients. A P-value of <0.05 was significant.

Results

Forty-three patients (42 female patients) underwent anorectal physiology and radiology imaging. The median age was 54 years (interquartile range, 41.5–60 years). Anismus was seen radiologically and physiologically in 18 (41.8%) and 12 patients (27.9%), respectively. The agreement between modalities was 0.298 (P = 0.04). Using physiology as a reference, radiology had positive and negative predictive values of 44% and 84%, respectively. Rectoceles, cystoceles, enteroceles and pathological pelvic floor descent were not physiologically predictive of animus (P > 0.05). The sphincterial straining pressure was 71 mmHg in the anismus group versus 12 mmHg. Radiology was likely to identify anismus when the straining pressure exceeded 50% of the resting pressure (P = 0.08).

Conclusion

Radiological techniques detect pelvic morphological abnormalities, but lead to overdiagnoses of anismus. No proctographic pathological feature predicts anismus reliably. A stronger pelvic floor paradoxical contraction is associated with a greater likelihood of detection by proctography.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Can Puborectalis Muscle and Abdominal Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue Thickness Indicate Dyssynergic Defecation?
    Eren Çamur, Dilek Acar
    New Trends in Medicine Sciences.2024; 5(3): 168.     CrossRef
  • MR Defecography Findings Suggesting Anismus: Reliable or not Reliable?
    Diğdem Kuru Öz, Nuray Haliloğlu, Ayşe Erden
    Journal of Ankara University Faculty of Medicine.2023; 75(4): 515.     CrossRef
  • Anismus Through Surgical Eyes
    Lester Gottesman
    Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2022; 65(2): 137.     CrossRef
  • Comparison of Anismus and Perineal Descent on Static Images of Magnetic Resonance Defecography: Can We Rule Out Anismus in Patients Who Can not Defecate?
    Nuray Haliloğlu, Mustafa Fatih Arslan, Ayşe Erden
    Turkish Journal of Colorectal Disease.2022; 32(1): 54.     CrossRef
  • Magnetic resonance defecography findings of dyssynergic defecation
    Nuray Haliloglu, Ayse Erden
    Polish Journal of Radiology.2022; 87: 181.     CrossRef
  • MRI DEFECOGRAPHY IN PELVIC FLOOR DESCENT SYNDROME (review)
    E. P. Goncharova, I. V. Zarodnyuk
    Koloproktologia.2020; 19(1): 117.     CrossRef
  • Current Situation on the Diagnosis of Anismus-Discordances Between Imaging and a Physiologic Study
    Kyung Ha Lee, Ji Yeon Kim
    Annals of Coloproctology.2016; 32(5): 159.     CrossRef

Ann Coloproctol : Annals of Coloproctology Twitter Facebook
TOP