- Anorectal Manometry Versus Patient-Reported Outcome Measures as a Predictor of Maximal Treatment for Fecal Incontinence
-
Lisa Ramage, Shengyang Qiu, Zhu Yeap, Constantinos Simillis, Christos Kontovounisios, Paris Tekkis, Emile Tan
-
Ann Coloproctol. 2019;35(6):319-326. Published online December 31, 2019
-
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2018.10.16
-
-
3,722
View
-
67
Download
-
4
Web of Science
-
6
Citations
-
 Abstract
 PDF
- Purpose
This study aims to establish the ability of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and anorectal manometry (ARM) in predicting the need for surgery in patients with fecal incontinence (FI).
Methods
Between 2008 and 2015, PROMs data, including the Birmingham Bowel and Urinary Symptoms Questionnaire (BBUSQ), Short Form 36 (SF-36), Wexner Incontinence Score and ARM results, were prospectively collected from 276 patients presenting with FI. Spearman rank was used to assess correlations between specific PROMs questions and ARM assessments of sphincter motor function. Binomial regression analyses were performed to identify factors predictive of the need for surgery. Finally, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to establish the utility of individual ARM and PROMs variables in predicting the need for surgical intervention in patients with FI.
Results
Two hundred twenty-eight patients (82.60%) were treated conservatively while 48 (17.39%) underwent surgery. On univariate analyses, all 4 domains of the BBUSQ, all 8 domains of the SF-36, and the Wexner Incontinence Score were significant predictors of surgery. Additionally, maximum resting pressure, 5-second squeeze endurance, threshold volume, and urge volume were significant. On ROC curve analyses, the only significant ARM measurement was the 5-second squeeze endurance. PROMs, such as the incontinence domain of the BBUSQ and five of the SF-36 domains, were identified as fair discriminators of the need for surgery.
Conclusion
PROMs are reliable predictors of maximal treatment in patients with FI and can be readily used in primary care to aid surgical referrals and can be applied in hospital settings as an aid to guide surgical treatment decisions.
-
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by  - Correlation of Digital Rectal Examination and Anorectal Manometry with Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Women with Fecal Incontinence
Alayne Markland, Mary Ackenbom, Uduak Andy, Ben Carper, Eric Jelovsek, Douglas Luchristt, Shawn Menefee, Rebecca Rogers, Vivian Sung, Donna Mazloomdoost, Maria Gantz
International Urogynecology Journal.2024; 35(12): 2367. CrossRef - Pelvic floor investigations for anal incontinence: Are they useful to predict outcomes from conservative treatment?
Karina Cuinas, Linda Ferrari, Carlene Igbedioh, Deepa Solanki, Andrew Williams, Alexis Schizas, Alison Hainsworth
Neurourology and Urodynamics.2023; 42(5): 1122. CrossRef - Anorectal dysfunction in multiple sclerosis patients: A pilot study on the effect of an individualized rehabilitation approach
Martina Kovari, Jan Stovicek, Jakub Novak, Michaela Havlickova, Sarka Mala, Andrew Busch, Pavel Kolar, Alena Kobesova
NeuroRehabilitation.2022; 50(1): 89. CrossRef - Postpartum fecal incontinence. State of the problem
D.R. Markaryan, A.M. Lukyanov, T.N. Garmanova, M.A. Agapov, V.A. Kubyshkin
Khirurgiya. Zhurnal im. N.I. Pirogova.2022; (6): 127. CrossRef - Functional outcomes after sphincter-preserving surgeries for low-lying rectal cancer: A review
Eun Jung Park, Seung Hyuk Baik
Precision and Future Medicine.2021; 5(4): 164. CrossRef - Usefulness of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Anorectal Physiologic Tests in Predicting Clinical Outcome for Fecal Incontinence
Chang-Nam Kim
Annals of Coloproctology.2019; 35(6): 289. CrossRef
|
KSCP
APFCP
SIUCP-ETS
