Digitation associated with defecation: what does it mean in urogynaecological patients?

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorHai-Ying, Cao
dc.contributor.authorGuzmán Rojas, Rodrigo
dc.contributor.authorCaudwell, Jessica
dc.contributor.authorKamisan, Ixora
dc.contributor.authorDietz, Hans
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-17T15:09:34Z
dc.date.available2016-05-17T15:09:34Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Obstructed defecation is a common symptom complex in urogynaecological patients, and perineal, vaginal and/or anal digitation may required for defecation. Translabial ultrasound can be used to assess anorectal anatomy, similar to defecation proctography. The aim of the present study was to determine the association between different forms of digitation (vaginal, perineal and anal) and abnormal posterior compartment anatomy. METHODS: A total of 271 patients were analysed in a retrospective study utilising archived ultrasound volume datasets. Symptoms of obstructed defecation (straining at stool, incomplete bowel emptying, perineal, vaginal and anal digitation) were ascertained on interview. Postprocessing of stored 3D/4D translabial ultrasound datasets obtained on maximal Valsalva was used to diagnose descent of the rectal ampulla, rectocoele, enterocoele and rectal intussusception at a later date, blinded to all clinical data. RESULTS: Digitation was reported by 39 % of our population. The position of the rectal ampulla on Valsalva was associated with perineal (p = 0.02) and vaginal (p = 0.02) digitation. The presence of a true rectocoele was significantly associated with perineal (p = 0.04) and anal (p = 0.03) digitation. Rectocoele depth was associated with all three forms of digitation (P = 0.005-0.02). The bother of symptoms of obstructed defecation was strongly associated with digitation (all P < = 0.001), with no appreciable difference in bother among the three forms. CONCLUSION: Digitation is common, and all forms of digitation are associated with abnormal posterior compartment anatomy. It may not be necessary to distinguish between different forms of digitation in clinical practice.
dc.identifier.citationHai-Ying C, Guzmán Rojas R, Hall JC, Atan IK, Dietz HP. Digitation associated with defecation: what does it mean in urogynaecological patients? Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Feb;27(2):229-32
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11447/264
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2813-7
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherIUGA with Springer International Publishing AG
dc.subjectDigitation
dc.subjectObstructed defecation
dc.subjectTranslabial ultrasound
dc.subjectPelvic floor
dc.subjectRectocoele
dc.titleDigitation associated with defecation: what does it mean in urogynaecological patients?
dc.typeArtículo

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Digitation associated with defecation what does it mean in urogynaecological patients.pdf
Size:
309.4 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Texto completo
Download

Collections

Artículos Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud

Implementado por OpenGeek Services