O’Connell, P. R.

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.

Consensus abstract Background The management of primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes (PRC-bTME) and recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) is challenging. There is global variation in standards and no guidelines exist. To achieve cure most patients require extended, multivisceral, exenterative surgery, beyond conventional total mesorectal excision planes. The aim of the Beyond TME Group was to achieve consensus on the definitions and principles of management, and to identify areas of research priority. Methods Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus. The Group consisted of invited experts from surgery, radiology, oncology and pathology. The process included two international dedicated discussion conferences, formal feedback, three rounds of editing and two rounds of anonymized web-based voting. Consensus was achieved with more than 80 per cent agreement; less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus. During conferences held in September 2011 and March 2012, open discussion took place on areas in which there is a low level of consensus. Results The final consensus document included 51 voted statements, making recommendations on ten key areas of PRC-bTME and RRC. Consensus agreement was achieved on the recommendations of 49 statements, with 34 achieving consensus in over 95 per cent. The lowest level of consensus obtained was 76 per cent. There was clear identification of the need for referral to a specialist multidisciplinary team for diagnosis, assessment and further management. Conclusion The consensus process has provided guidance for the management of patients with PRC-bTME or RRC, taking into account global variations in surgical techniques and technology. It has further identified areas of research priority.

Consensus abstract Background The management of primary rectal cancer beyond total mesorectal excision planes (PRC-bTME) and recurrent rectal cancer (RRC) is challenging. There is global variation in standards and no guidelines exist. To achieve cure most patients require extended, multivisceral, exenterative surgery, beyond conventional total mesorectal excision planes. The aim of the Beyond TME Group was to achieve consensus on the definitions and principles of management, and to identify areas of research priority. Methods Delphi methodology was used to achieve consensus. The Group consisted of invited experts from surgery, radiology, oncology and pathology. The process included two international dedicated discussion conferences, formal feedback, three rounds of editing and two rounds of anonymized web-based voting. Consensus was achieved with more than 80 per cent agreement; less than 80 per cent agreement indicated low consensus. During conferences held in September 2011 and March 2012, open discussion took place on areas in which there is a low level of consensus. Results The final consensus document included 51 voted statements, making recommendations on ten key areas of PRC-bTME and RRC. Consensus agreement was achieved on the recommendations of 49 statements, with 34 achieving consensus in over 95 per cent. The lowest level of consensus obtained was 76 per cent. There was clear identification of the need for referral to a specialist multidisciplinary team for diagnosis, assessment and further management. Conclusion The consensus process has provided guidance for the management of patients with PRC-bTME or RRC, taking into account global variations in surgical techniques and technology. It has further identified areas of research priority.

AbstractThe aim was to determine whether changes in enteric bacteriology, absorption, morphology, and emptying occur after ileal pouch–anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis, and to relate any changes to the clinical result. Twenty patients were studied 26 ± 2 months (mean ± s.e.m.) after operation. Eight patients had a good result, six a poor result, and six a history of recurrent pouch ileitis. Anaerobic and aerobic overgrowth occurred in the jejunum of patients with a poor result, but not in those with a good result or with pouch ileitis. In contrast, ileal pouch bacterial overgrowth occurred in all patients regardless of the clinical result. Patients with jejunal overgrowth had increased 24 h stool volume and stool nitrogen, but other patients did not. The larger the stool volume, the greater the anaerobic overgrowth. Pouch biopsies showed chronic inflammation in all patients, while 45 per cent had colonic metaplasia. Neither the inflammation nor the metaplasia correlated with the clinical result, nor did the clinical result correlate with the efficiency of pouch emptying. In conclusion, jejunal bacterial overgrowth after ileal pouch–anal anastomosis was associated with an increased stool output, azotorrhoea, and a poor clinical result. A distinguishing bacterial, absorptive, morphological, or emptying abnormality was not found in patients with a history of recurrent pouch ileitis.

AbstractThe motor function of the ileal J pouch after ileal pouch‐anal anastomosis has a key role in the clinical outcome. The pouch forms a neorectum that aids in the maintenance of reasonable continence. The maximum capacity of the pouch (mean, 320 ml) is similar to that of the healthy rectum (330 ml). The pouch accommodates to distension, keeping intrapouch pressure low as the pouch gradually fills with stool. The change in pouch volume with each change in pressure (15 ml/mm Hg) approximates that of the healthy rectum (19 ml/mm Hg). When a threshold volume of about 150 ml is reached, large‐amplitude (>25 mm Hg), prolonged (40–60 sec), propulsive waves appear in the pouch. They initiate the call to stool. With continuing distention of the pouch to its functional capacity, which is about 200 ml, reflux of stool into the distal ileum begins, the large pressure waves become more frequent, and the urge for defecation more intense. Defecation is voluntary, spontaneous, and rapid (11 ml/sec), with the pouch and distal ileum emptying concurrently. About 60% of the pouch content, a volume of about 100 ml of stool, is discharged with each bowel movement. The greater the threshold volume and the more complete the evacuation, the fewer the bowel movements per day. After evacuation, the large pressure waves subside, and the next cycle of pouch filling and emptying begins.