Investigation of Defecographic Findings in Patients with Pelvic Outlet Obstructive Disease

Kim, Kyong Rae; Kim, Young Sok; Chung, Soon Sup; Ahn, Eun Jung; Oh, Soo Youn; Park, Ung Chae; Shon, Dae Ho; Sakong, Joon; Kim, Sang Woon; Kim, Jae Hwang; Shim, Min Chul

Abstract

PURPOSE: Defecography is a dynamic investigation which can influence clinical decision making in patients with pelvic outlet obstructive disease (POOD). The current study was designed to establish defecographic findings in patients with POOD. Specifically, we sought to assess the physiologic characteristics of categorized types by using anorectal physiologic tests.
METHODS
One hundred seven patients (disease group; 45 men, 62 women) with POOD were retrospectively categorized as type I [non-relaxation of puborectalis (NRPR) only, n=19], type II [NRPR and rectocele, n=20], type III [NRPR, rectocele, and dynamic perineal descent (PD), n=17], type IV [deformed rectocele, mild-to-moderate fixed PD, and absence of NRPR, n=29], and type V [rectocele, severe fixed PD, and absence of NRPR, n=20] on the bases of defecographic findings. The ability to evacuate, the frequency/degree of intarectal intussusception (IRI), and the size of the rectocele were evaulated in these defecographic types of POOD. Age, duration of symptoms, and the physiologic findings of anal manometry and EMG/PNTML were compared for the five types. Eighteen healthy volunteers who had no defecation difficulty were used to estimate the normal findings of defecography.
RESULTS
The age and the sex showed no significant differences among the types. The duration of symptoms was gradually lengthened from type I to V (P<0.01). The ability to evacuate in patients with POOD was significantly worse (failed to effectively evacuate) compared to that in the healthy volunteers (P<0.01). The frequency of IRI was increased more and more from type I to V (P<0.01). The size of the rectocele was significantly increased in types V compared to the other types (P<0.01). Manometric and neurologic findings, including EMG/PNTML, revealed no significant differences among the types.
CONCLUSIONS
Even though there were no specific differences in the findings of the anal manometric and neurologic tests, the evacuation dynamics; were different in the five defecographic categories of patients with POOD. Specifically, these differences were relevants to the presence of NRPR, rectoceles, IRI, and perineal descent.