Sigrid Young, Briton Lee, Scott Smukalla, Jordan Axelrad, Shannon Chang
{"title":"肠袋-肛门吻合术治疗溃疡性结肠炎后大便失禁患者的肛肠压力测定:一项队列研究","authors":"Sigrid Young, Briton Lee, Scott Smukalla, Jordan Axelrad, Shannon Chang","doi":"10.1093/crocol/otad063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background Fecal incontinence commonly occurs in patients with ulcerative colitis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. There is a paucity of manometric data in pouch patients. We aimed to better define manometric parameters in pouch patients with fecal incontinence. Methods We compared clinical and manometric variables in ulcerative colitis patients with pouch and fecal incontinence to ulcerative colitis patients with pouch without fecal incontinence and to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Manometric data for the three cohorts were compared to established normative data. An independent samples t-test was performed for continuous variables; chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of incontinence in pouch patients (p<0.05). Results Among 26 pouch patients with fecal incontinence (73% female), 26 pouch patients without fecal incontinence (35% female), and 84 patients with fecal incontinence without ulcerative colitis (68% female), there were no differences in anorectal pressures between patients with fecal incontinence. Lower pressures were observed in pouch patients with fecal incontinence compared to those without fecal incontinence. Resting pressure was similar between pouch patients with fecal incontinence and healthy controls (60.9±36.1mmHg vs. 66.9±3.2mmHg, p=0.40). Female sex (p=0.019) and defecatory disorders (p=0.033) each independently predicted fecal incontinence in pouch patients. Conclusions Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have lower anorectal pressures compared to pouch patients without incontinence, though have similar pressures to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have similar resting pressures as healthy controls. Distinct manometric normative values for pouch patients are needed.","PeriodicalId":10847,"journal":{"name":"Crohn's & Colitis 360","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anorectal Manometry in Patients with Fecal Incontinence After Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis for Ulcerative Colitis: A Cohort Study\",\"authors\":\"Sigrid Young, Briton Lee, Scott Smukalla, Jordan Axelrad, Shannon Chang\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/crocol/otad063\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Background Fecal incontinence commonly occurs in patients with ulcerative colitis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. There is a paucity of manometric data in pouch patients. We aimed to better define manometric parameters in pouch patients with fecal incontinence. Methods We compared clinical and manometric variables in ulcerative colitis patients with pouch and fecal incontinence to ulcerative colitis patients with pouch without fecal incontinence and to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Manometric data for the three cohorts were compared to established normative data. An independent samples t-test was performed for continuous variables; chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of incontinence in pouch patients (p<0.05). Results Among 26 pouch patients with fecal incontinence (73% female), 26 pouch patients without fecal incontinence (35% female), and 84 patients with fecal incontinence without ulcerative colitis (68% female), there were no differences in anorectal pressures between patients with fecal incontinence. Lower pressures were observed in pouch patients with fecal incontinence compared to those without fecal incontinence. Resting pressure was similar between pouch patients with fecal incontinence and healthy controls (60.9±36.1mmHg vs. 66.9±3.2mmHg, p=0.40). Female sex (p=0.019) and defecatory disorders (p=0.033) each independently predicted fecal incontinence in pouch patients. Conclusions Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have lower anorectal pressures compared to pouch patients without incontinence, though have similar pressures to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have similar resting pressures as healthy controls. Distinct manometric normative values for pouch patients are needed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Crohn's & Colitis 360\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Crohn's & Colitis 360\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/crocol/otad063\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crohn's & Colitis 360","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/crocol/otad063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景溃疡性结肠炎和回肠袋-肛门吻合术患者常发生大便失禁。眼袋患者的血压测量数据缺乏。我们的目的是更好地定义袋尿失禁患者的压力测量参数。方法比较溃疡性结肠炎伴袋尿失禁患者、伴袋尿失禁溃疡性结肠炎伴袋尿失禁患者和伴袋尿失禁非溃疡性结肠炎伴袋尿失禁患者的临床和测压变量。将三个队列的测压数据与已建立的规范数据进行比较。对连续变量进行独立样本t检验;分类变量采用卡方检验。采用Logistic回归分析确定眼袋患者尿失禁的预测因素(p<0.05)。结果在26例大便失禁袋患者(女性占73%)、26例无大便失禁袋患者(女性占35%)和84例无溃疡性结肠炎的大便失禁患者(女性占68%)中,大便失禁患者的肛肠压力无差异。与无大便失禁的荷包患者相比,有大便失禁的荷包患者血压较低。袋尿失禁患者的静息压与健康对照组相似(60.9±36.1mmHg vs 66.9±3.2mmHg, p=0.40)。女性(p=0.019)和排便障碍(p=0.033)分别独立预测尿袋患者的大便失禁。结论:与非溃疡性结肠炎伴大便失禁的患者相比,袋装大便失禁患者的肛肠压力较低,但其肛肠压力与非溃疡性结肠炎伴大便失禁患者相似。袋尿失禁患者的静息压力与健康对照组相似。眼袋患者需要明确的测压标准值。
Anorectal Manometry in Patients with Fecal Incontinence After Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis for Ulcerative Colitis: A Cohort Study
Abstract Background Fecal incontinence commonly occurs in patients with ulcerative colitis and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. There is a paucity of manometric data in pouch patients. We aimed to better define manometric parameters in pouch patients with fecal incontinence. Methods We compared clinical and manometric variables in ulcerative colitis patients with pouch and fecal incontinence to ulcerative colitis patients with pouch without fecal incontinence and to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Manometric data for the three cohorts were compared to established normative data. An independent samples t-test was performed for continuous variables; chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of incontinence in pouch patients (p<0.05). Results Among 26 pouch patients with fecal incontinence (73% female), 26 pouch patients without fecal incontinence (35% female), and 84 patients with fecal incontinence without ulcerative colitis (68% female), there were no differences in anorectal pressures between patients with fecal incontinence. Lower pressures were observed in pouch patients with fecal incontinence compared to those without fecal incontinence. Resting pressure was similar between pouch patients with fecal incontinence and healthy controls (60.9±36.1mmHg vs. 66.9±3.2mmHg, p=0.40). Female sex (p=0.019) and defecatory disorders (p=0.033) each independently predicted fecal incontinence in pouch patients. Conclusions Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have lower anorectal pressures compared to pouch patients without incontinence, though have similar pressures to non-ulcerative colitis patients with fecal incontinence. Pouch patients with fecal incontinence have similar resting pressures as healthy controls. Distinct manometric normative values for pouch patients are needed.