Basilisco, Guido

Abstract Background Anorectal manometry (ARM) comprehensively assesses anorectal sensorimotor functions. Purpose This review examines the indications, techniques, interpretation, strengths, and weaknesses of high‐resolution ARM (HR‐ARM), 3‐dimensional high‐resolution anorectal manometry (3D‐HR‐ARM), and portable ARM, and other assessments (i.e., rectal sensation and rectal balloon expulsion test) that are performed alongside manometry. It is based on a literature search of articles related to ARM in adults. HR‐ARM and 3D‐HR‐ARM are useful for diagnosing defecatory disorders (DD), to identify anorectal sensorimotor dysfunction and guide management in patients with fecal incontinence (FI), constipation, megacolon, and megarectum; and to screen for anorectal structural (e.g., rectal intussusception) abnormalities. The rectal balloon expulsion test is a useful, low‐cost, radiation‐free, outpatient assessment tool for impaired evacuation that is performed and interpreted in conjunction with ARM. The anorectal function tests should be interpreted with reference to age‐ and sex‐matched normal values, clinical features, and results of other tests. A larger database of technique‐specific normal values and newer paradigms of analyzing anorectal pressure profiles will increase the precision and diagnostic utility of HR‐ARM for identifying abnormal mechanisms of defecation and continence.

AbstractIntroduced approximately 10 years ago, high‐resolution manometry catheters have fostered interest in anorectal manometry. This review, which accompanies two articles in this issue of Neurogastroenterology and Motility, reviews the methods, clinical indications, utility, and pitfalls of anorectal manometry and revisits the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Medical Position Statement on Anorectal Testing Techniques, which was last published in 1999. High‐resolution manometry provides a refined assessment of the anorectal pressure profile, obviates the need for station pull‐through maneuvers, and minimizes movement artifacts. In selected cases, this refined assessment may be useful for identifying structural abnormalities or anal weakness. However, many manometry patterns that were previously regarded as abnormal are also observed in a majority of healthy patients, which substantially limits the utility of manometry for identifying defecatory disorders. It is our impression that most conclusions of the AGA medical position statement from 1999 remain valid today. High‐resolution techniques have not substantially affected the number of publications on or management of anorectal disorders. The ongoing efforts of an international working group to standardize techniques for anorectal manometry are welcome. Although high‐resolution manometry is more than an expensive hobby, improvements in catheter design and further research to rigorously define and evaluate these techniques are necessary to determine if they are worth every penny.