Bharucha, Adil E.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) is a common disorder associated with significant impairment in quality of life. This clinical practice guideline, jointly developed by the American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology, aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of CIC in adults. METHODS: The American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that conducted systematic reviews of the following agents: fiber, osmotic laxatives (polyethylene glycol, magnesium oxide, lactulose), stimulant laxatives (bisacodyl, sodium picosulfate, senna), secretagogues (lubiprostone, linaclotide, plecanatide), and serotonin type 4 agonist (prucalopride). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to assess the certainty of evidence for each intervention. The Evidence to Decision framework was used to develop clinical recommendations based on the balance between the desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 10 recommendations for the pharmacological management of CIC in adults. Based on available evidence, the panel made strong recommendations for the use of polyethylene glycol, sodium picosulfate, linaclotide, plecanatide, and prucalopride for CIC in adults. Conditional recommendations were made for the use of fiber, lactulose, senna, magnesium oxide, and lubiprostone. DISCUSSION: This document provides a comprehensive outline of the various over-the-counter and prescription pharmacological agents available for the treatment of CIC. The guidelines are meant to provide a framework for approaching the management of CIC; clinical providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences as well as medication cost and availability. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to help guide future research opportunities and enhance the care of patients with chronic constipation.

AbstractBackground and objectivesChronic constipation (CC) may be caused by defecatory disorders (DDs) and associated with reduced rectal sensation. Among patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and CC (T1DCC patients), the prevalence of DDs and reduced rectal sensation is unknown. We sought to compare complications of T1D, anorectal dysfunction, and CC symptoms, among T1DCC patients with versus without a DD.MethodsAnorectal pressures at rest and during squeeze and evacuation, as well as rectal sensation and rectal balloon expulsion time (BET) were measured with high‐resolution anorectal manometry in 114 consecutive T1DCC patients.ResultsThirty‐seven patients (32%) had prolonged BET, suggestive of a DD. Complications of T1D included peripheral neuropathy (n = 67, 59%), retinopathy (n = 42, 37%), and nephropathy (n = 26, 23%). Among these complications, only retinopathy was associated with, that is, more prevalent in patients with normal (45%) than prolonged BET (19%). Compared with patients with normal BET, patients with prolonged BET had a lower rectal pressure (mean [SD], 32 [23] mm Hg vs. 23 [19] mm Hg,p = 0.03), greater anal pressure (91 [23] mm Hg vs. 68 [36] mm Hg,p < 0.001), and lower rectoanal gradient (−67 [30] mm Hg vs. −36 [32] mm Hg,p < 0.0001) during evacuation. Anal resting pressure and anal squeeze increment were below normal in 14 (13%) and 32 (29%) of patients and one or more rectal sensory thresholds were above normal in 34 (30%) patients; these abnormalities affected similar proportions in the normal and prolonged BET cohorts.ConclusionsAmong T1DCC patients, 37 (32%) had prolonged BET, which was associated with anorectal pressures indicative of a DD but was not associated with reduced rectal sensation, suggesting that DDs are more likely explained by abdomino‐anal dyscoordination than visceral disturbance.

Objective Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) has gained global adoption but our understanding of its mechanism(s) of action and durability of efficacy is limited. We sought to determine changes in gastric emptying (GE), gastric motility (GM), hormones and eating behaviours after ESG. Design A priori-designed single-centre substudy of a large US randomised clinical trial, adults with obesity were randomised to ESG or lifestyle interventions (LS) alone. We measured GE, hormones and weight loss and assessed eating behaviours. In a subset of ESG patients, we assessed GM. The primary outcome was the change in T1/2 (min) at 3 months, and secondary outcomes were changes in weight, GE, GM, hormones and eating behaviours. We used t-test analyses and regression to determine the association between GE and weight loss. Results 36 (ESG=18; LS=18) participated in this substudy. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. At 3 months, T1/2 was delayed in the ESG group (n=17) compared with the LS group (n=17) (152.3±47.3 vs 89.1±27.9; p<0.001). At 12 months, T1/2 remained delayed in the ESG group (n=16) vs control group (n=14) (137±37.4 vs 90.1±23.4; p<0.001). Greater delays in GE at 3 months were associated with greater weight loss. GM was preserved and fasting ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide 1 and polypeptide YY significantly increased 18 months after ESG. Conclusion ESG promotes weight loss through several key mechanistic pathways involving GE and hormones while preserving GM. These findings further support clinical adoption of this technique for the management of obesity. Trial registration number NCT03406975.

AbstractBackgroundMore common in older women than younger women, rectoceles may be secondary to pelvic floor weakness and/or pelvic floor dysfunction with impaired rectal evacuation. Rectoceles may be small (<2 cm), medium (2–4 cm), or large (>4 cm). Arguably, large rectoceles are more likely to be associated with symptoms (e.g., difficult defecation). It can be challenging to ascertain the extent to which a rectocele is secondary to pelvic floor dysfunction and/or whether a rectocele, rather than associated pelvic floor dysfunction, is responsible for symptoms. Surgical repair should be considered when initial treatment measures (e.g., bowel modifying agents and pelvic floor biofeedback therapy) are unsuccessful.PurposeWe summarize the clinical features, diagnosis, and management of rectoceles, with an emphasis on outcomes after surgical repair. This review accompanies a retrospective analysis of outcomes after multidisciplinary, transvaginal rectocele repair procedures undertaken by three colorectal surgeons in 215 patients at a large teaching hospital in the UK. A majority of patients had a large rectocele. Some patients also underwent an anterior levatorplasty and/or an enterocele repair. All patients were jointly assessed, and some patients underwent surgery by colorectal and urogynecologic surgeons. In this cohort, the perioperative data, efficacy, and harms outcomes are comparable with historical data predominantly derived from retrospective series in which patients had a good outcome (67%–78%), symptoms of difficult defecation improved (30%–50%), and patients had a recurrent rectocele 2 years after surgery (17%). Building on these data, prospective studies that rigorously evaluate outcomes after surgical repair are necessary.

Abstract Background Some patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on immunosuppressive therapies may have a blunted response to certain vaccines, including the messenger RNA (mRNA) coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. However, few studies have evaluated the cell-mediated immune response (CMIR), which is critical to host defense after COVID-19 infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the humoral immune response and CMIR after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in patients with IBD. Methods This prospective study (HERCULES [HumoRal and CellULar initial and Sustained immunogenicity in patients with IBD] study) evaluated humoral immune response and CMIR after completion of 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in 158 IBD patients and 20 healthy control (HC) subjects. The primary outcome was the CMIR to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in patients with IBD. The secondary outcomes were a comparison of (1) the CMIR in patients with IBD and HC subjects, (2) CMIR and humoral immune response in all participants, and (3) correlation between CMIR and humoral immune response. Results The majority (89%) of patients with IBD developed a CMIR, which was not different vs HC subjects (94%) (P = .6667). There was no significant difference (P = .5488) in CMIR between immunocompetent (median 255 [interquartile range, 146-958] spike T cells per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells) and immunosuppressed patients (median 377 [interquartile range, 123-1440]). There was no correlation between humoral and cell-mediated immunity after vaccination (P = .5215). In univariable analysis, anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy was associated with a higher CMIRs (P = .02) and confirmed in a multivariable model (P = .02). No other variables were associated with CMIR. Conclusions Most patients with IBD achieved CMIR to a COVID-19 vaccine. Future studies are needed evaluating sustained CMIR and clinical outcomes.

AbstractBackground and AimsAlthough high‐resolution manometry (HR_ARM) is commonly used to diagnose defecatory disorders, its intraindividual day‐to‐day reproducibility is unknown. Since these measurements entail voluntary effort, this study aimed to evaluate the intraindividual day‐to‐day reproducibility of HR_ARM.MethodsIn 22 healthy women (35 years [14] mean [SD]) and 53 constipated patients (42 years [13], 46 women), the rectal balloon expulsion time (BET), and anorectal pressures were measured with HR_ARM on 2 days separated by a median (interquartile range) of 15 days (11–53) in healthy and 40 days (8–75) in constipated patients. Anorectal pressures were evaluated at rest (20 s), during squeeze, and during evacuation. Rectal sensation was also evaluated in constipated patients. The agreement between both measurements was evaluated with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and other tests.ResultsAmong constipated patients, the anal resting (mean CCC [95%CI] 0.62 [0.43–0.76]) and squeeze pressures (CCC 0.65 [0.47–0.79]), rectoanal gradient during evacuation (CCC 0.42 [0.17–0.62]), and rectal sensory thresholds (CCC for urgency 0.72 [0.52–0.84]) were concordant. Between days 1 and 2, one or more outcomes, characterized as normal or abnormal, differed in 79% of constipated patients, i.e., anal resting and squeeze pressures, the gradient, and the rectal BET differed in, respectively, 25%, 19%, 36%, and 10% of constipated patients. The rectal BET was prolonged in three healthy persons (both days) and either on 1 day (six patients) or 2 days (33 patients) in constipated patients.ConclusionsWhile HR_ARM variables and the BET are reproducible within healthy and constipated persons, the outcome on repeat testing differed in 79% of constipated patients.

AbstractBackgroundDuring high‐resolution anorectal manometry (HR_ARM), the raw data are converted into software‐derived summary variables (e.g., rectoanal gradient during evacuation) that capture only a snapshot of the data collected during HR_ARM and are less useful than newer indices, which are also derived from the raw data, for diagnosing defecatory disorders (DD). However, it is cumbersome and time‐consuming to extract raw data from the program and calculate such indices. This study aimed to devise a user‐friendly approach to extract anorectal pressures measured with HR_ARM.MethodsAnorectal pressures at rest, during anal squeeze, and evacuation were measured with HR_ARM in 180 women, among whom 60 each were healthy, had DD, or fecal incontinence. A reverse engineering approach extracted pressure values from color images in HR_ARM reports. The summary variables generated by the software and a reverse engineering approach were compared with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), pairedt‐tests, and Bland–Altman's tests.ResultsAnorectal pressures summarized by the software and a reverse engineering method were highly concordant for anal resting (CCC [95% CI], 0.98 [0.97, 0.99]) and squeeze pressures (0.99 [0.99, 0.99) and the rectoanal gradient during evacuation with an empty (0.98 [0.97, 0.98]) and a filled balloon (0.99 [0.99, 0.99]). For most variables, the paired t and Bland–Altman comparisons were not significant.ConclusionsAnorectal pressures can be accurately determined from pressure topography images in HR_ARM reports. In future, this reverse engineering approach can be harnessed to compile large HR_ARM datasets across centers and to uncover newer, potentially more useful summary rectoanal pressure variables.

AbstractBackgroundThe optimal methods for measuring and analyzing anal resting and squeeze pressure with high‐resolution manometry (HRM) are unclear.MethodsAnal resting and squeeze pressures were measured with HRM in 90 healthy women, 35 women with defecatory disorders (DD), and 85 with fecal incontinence (FI). Pressures were analyzed with Manoview™ software and a customized approach. Resting pressures measured for 20, 60, and 300 s were compared. During the squeeze period, (3 maneuvers, 20 s each), the squeeze increment, which was averaged over 5, 10, 15, and 20 s, and squeeze duration were evaluated.ResultsCompared to healthy women, the anal resting pressure, squeeze pressure increment, and squeeze duration were lower in FI (p ≤ 0.04) but not in DD. The 20, 60, and 300 s resting pressures were strongly correlated (concordance correlation coefficients = 0.96–0.99) in healthy and DD women. The 5 s squeeze increment was the greatest; 10, 15, and 20 s values were progressively lower (p < 0.001). The squeeze pressure increment and duration differed (p < 0.01) among the three maneuvers in healthy and DD women but not in FI women. The upper 95th percentile limit for squeeze duration was 19.5 s in controls, 19.9 s in DD, and 19.3 s in FI. Adjusted for age, resting pressure, and squeeze duration, a greater squeeze increment was associated with a lower risk of FI versus health (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94–0.97).ConclusionsThese findings suggest that anal resting and squeeze pressures can be accurately measured over 20 s. In most patients, one squeeze maneuver is probably sufficient.