Carolina Alexandra Zambrano Pérez, Erick Manuel Toro-Monjaraz, Samuel Nurko, Oscar Pérez-González, José Cadena-León, Karen Ignorosa-Arellano, Roberto Cervantes-Bustamante, Jaime Ramirez-Mayans, Ericka Montijo Barrios, Flora Zárate-Mondragón
{"title":"直肠指检与高分辨率肛肠测压在儿科排便障碍诊断中的应用比较。","authors":"Carolina Alexandra Zambrano Pérez, Erick Manuel Toro-Monjaraz, Samuel Nurko, Oscar Pérez-González, José Cadena-León, Karen Ignorosa-Arellano, Roberto Cervantes-Bustamante, Jaime Ramirez-Mayans, Ericka Montijo Barrios, Flora Zárate-Mondragón","doi":"10.1111/nmo.70061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Currently, high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM) is the only way to confirm the diagnosis of defecatory dyssynergia; however, it has limitations in pediatric patients. Digital rectal examination (DRE) may suggest the presence of defecatory dyssynergia based on clinical findings, but it is not a definitive diagnostic method. Its role in pediatric patients remains unexplored. The objective of this study was to determine the usefulness of DRE as a diagnostic test for dyssynergic defecation in pediatric patients compared with HRAM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients aged 5-18 years who were referred for HRAM in a third-level hospital in Mexico City between March 2022 and September 2022 were included. Altered propulsion or impaired push effort was considered a suggestive diagnosis of dyssynergia by DRE. The results were compared with those obtained using HRAM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two patients were included, of whom 50% were male, with a median age of 10.68 years (standard deviation [SD] 3.23). Dyssynergia was diagnosed by DRE in 21 patients (50%) and by HRAM in 21 patients (50%). A sensitivity of 66% and a specificity of 66% were calculated for the alteration of rectal propulsion in DRE as suggestive of dyssynergia when compared to HRAM. A positive predictive value of 66% and a negative predictive value of 66% were calculated.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and inferences: </strong>The sensitivity and specificity of DRE for the diagnosis of dyssynergic defecation were lower than those reported for adults (75% and 85%, respectively). In some cases, DRE would be useful, especially in low-resource scenarios where HRAM is not available, and we recommend DRE prior to HRAM as a complementary approach to dyssynergic defecation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19123,"journal":{"name":"Neurogastroenterology and Motility","volume":" ","pages":"e70061"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Digital Rectal Exam Compared With High-Resolution Anorectal Manometry in the Diagnosis of Dyssynergic Defecation in Pediatrics.\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Alexandra Zambrano Pérez, Erick Manuel Toro-Monjaraz, Samuel Nurko, Oscar Pérez-González, José Cadena-León, Karen Ignorosa-Arellano, Roberto Cervantes-Bustamante, Jaime Ramirez-Mayans, Ericka Montijo Barrios, Flora Zárate-Mondragón\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/nmo.70061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Currently, high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM) is the only way to confirm the diagnosis of defecatory dyssynergia; however, it has limitations in pediatric patients. Digital rectal examination (DRE) may suggest the presence of defecatory dyssynergia based on clinical findings, but it is not a definitive diagnostic method. Its role in pediatric patients remains unexplored. The objective of this study was to determine the usefulness of DRE as a diagnostic test for dyssynergic defecation in pediatric patients compared with HRAM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients aged 5-18 years who were referred for HRAM in a third-level hospital in Mexico City between March 2022 and September 2022 were included. Altered propulsion or impaired push effort was considered a suggestive diagnosis of dyssynergia by DRE. The results were compared with those obtained using HRAM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two patients were included, of whom 50% were male, with a median age of 10.68 years (standard deviation [SD] 3.23). Dyssynergia was diagnosed by DRE in 21 patients (50%) and by HRAM in 21 patients (50%). A sensitivity of 66% and a specificity of 66% were calculated for the alteration of rectal propulsion in DRE as suggestive of dyssynergia when compared to HRAM. A positive predictive value of 66% and a negative predictive value of 66% were calculated.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and inferences: </strong>The sensitivity and specificity of DRE for the diagnosis of dyssynergic defecation were lower than those reported for adults (75% and 85%, respectively). In some cases, DRE would be useful, especially in low-resource scenarios where HRAM is not available, and we recommend DRE prior to HRAM as a complementary approach to dyssynergic defecation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19123,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurogastroenterology and Motility\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e70061\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurogastroenterology and Motility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.70061\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurogastroenterology and Motility","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.70061","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Use of Digital Rectal Exam Compared With High-Resolution Anorectal Manometry in the Diagnosis of Dyssynergic Defecation in Pediatrics.
Background: Currently, high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM) is the only way to confirm the diagnosis of defecatory dyssynergia; however, it has limitations in pediatric patients. Digital rectal examination (DRE) may suggest the presence of defecatory dyssynergia based on clinical findings, but it is not a definitive diagnostic method. Its role in pediatric patients remains unexplored. The objective of this study was to determine the usefulness of DRE as a diagnostic test for dyssynergic defecation in pediatric patients compared with HRAM.
Methods: Patients aged 5-18 years who were referred for HRAM in a third-level hospital in Mexico City between March 2022 and September 2022 were included. Altered propulsion or impaired push effort was considered a suggestive diagnosis of dyssynergia by DRE. The results were compared with those obtained using HRAM.
Results: Forty-two patients were included, of whom 50% were male, with a median age of 10.68 years (standard deviation [SD] 3.23). Dyssynergia was diagnosed by DRE in 21 patients (50%) and by HRAM in 21 patients (50%). A sensitivity of 66% and a specificity of 66% were calculated for the alteration of rectal propulsion in DRE as suggestive of dyssynergia when compared to HRAM. A positive predictive value of 66% and a negative predictive value of 66% were calculated.
Conclusions and inferences: The sensitivity and specificity of DRE for the diagnosis of dyssynergic defecation were lower than those reported for adults (75% and 85%, respectively). In some cases, DRE would be useful, especially in low-resource scenarios where HRAM is not available, and we recommend DRE prior to HRAM as a complementary approach to dyssynergic defecation.
期刊介绍:
Neurogastroenterology & Motility (NMO) is the official Journal of the European Society of Neurogastroenterology & Motility (ESNM) and the American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society (ANMS). It is edited by James Galligan, Albert Bredenoord, and Stephen Vanner. The editorial and peer review process is independent of the societies affiliated to the journal and publisher: Neither the ANMS, the ESNM or the Publisher have editorial decision-making power. Whenever these are relevant to the content being considered or published, the editors, journal management committee and editorial board declare their interests and affiliations.