Rao, Satish S.C.

Abstract Background This manuscript summarizes consensus reached by the International Anorectal Physiology Working Group (IAPWG) for the performance, terminology used, and interpretation of anorectal function testing including anorectal manometry (focused on high‐resolution manometry), the rectal sensory test, and the balloon expulsion test. Based on these measurements, a classification system for disorders of anorectal function is proposed. Methods Twenty‐nine working group members (clinicians/academics in the field of gastroenterology, coloproctology, and gastrointestinal physiology) were invited to six face‐to‐face and three remote meetings to derive consensus between 2014 and 2018. Key recommendations The IAPWG protocol for the performance of anorectal function testing recommends a standardized sequence of maneuvers to test rectoanal reflexes, anal tone and contractility, rectoanal coordination, and rectal sensation. Major findings not seen in healthy controls defined by the classification are as follows: rectoanal areflexia, anal hypotension and hypocontractility, rectal hyposensitivity, and hypersensitivity. Minor and inconclusive findings that can be present in health and require additional information prior to diagnosis include anal hypertension and dyssynergia. Conclusions and Inferences This framework introduces the IAPWG protocol and the London classification for disorders of anorectal function based on objective physiological measurement. The use of a common language to describe results of diagnostic tests, standard operating procedures, and a consensus classification system is designed to bring much‐needed standardization to these techniques.

SummaryBackgroundThe wireless motility capsule (WMC) offers the ability to investigate luminal gastrointestinal (GI) physiology in a minimally invasive manner.AimTo investigate the effect of testing protocol, gender, age and study country on regional GI transit times and associated pH values using the WMC.MethodsRegional GI transit times and pH values were determined in 215 healthy volunteers from USA and Sweden studied using the WMC over a 6.5‐year period. The effects of test protocol, gender, age and study country were examined.ResultsFor GI transit times, testing protocol was associated with differences in gastric emptying time (GET; shorter with protocol 2 (motility capsule ingested immediately after meal) vs. protocol 1 (motility capsule immediately before): median difference: 52 min, P = 0.0063) and colonic transit time (CTT; longer with protocol 2: median 140 min, P = 0.0189), but had no overall effect on whole gut transit time. Females had longer GET (by median 17 min, P = 0.0307), and also longer CTT by (104 min, P = 0.0285) and whole gut transit time by (263 min, P = 0.0077). Increasing age was associated with shorter small bowel transit time (P = 0.002), and study country also influenced small bowel and CTTs. Whole gut and CTTs showed clustering of data at values separated by 24 h, suggesting that describing these measures as continuous variables is invalid. Testing protocol, gender and study country also significantly influenced pH values.ConclusionsRegional GI transit times and pH values, delineated using the wireless motility capsule (WMC), vary based on testing protocol, gender, age and country. Standardisation of testing is crucial for cross‐referencing in clinical practice and future research.

AbstractBackgroundAnorectal disorders such as dyssynergic defecation, fecal incontinence, levator ani syndrome, and solitary rectal ulcer syndrome are common, and affect both the adult and pediatric populations. Although they are treated with several treatment approaches, over the last two decades, biofeedback therapy using visual and verbal feedback techniques has emerged as an useful option. Because it is safe, it is commonly recommended. However, the clinical efficacy of biofeedback therapy in adults and children is not clearly known, and there is a lack of critical appraisal of the techniques used and the outcomes of biofeedback therapy for these disorders.PurposeThe American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society and the European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility convened a task force to examine the indications, study performance characteristics, methodologies used, and the efficacy of biofeedback therapy, and to provide evidence‐based recommendations. Based on the strength of evidence, biofeedback therapy is recommended for the short‐term and long‐term treatment of constipation with dyssynergic defecation (Level I, Grade A), and for the treatment of fecal incontinence (Level II, Grade B). Biofeedback therapy may be useful in the short‐term treatment of Levator Ani Syndrome with dyssynergic defecation (Level II, Grade B), and solitary rectal ulcer syndrome with dyssynergic defecation (Level III, Grade C), but the evidence is fair. Evidence does not support the use of biofeedback for the treatment of childhood constipation (Level 1, Grade D).