Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_1558_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
ical-sector probes with a limited angle (120–210°) to
investigate and puncture the prostate, but they were
unsuitable for a sphincter. Later, radial probes were
developed with a 360° view. Also, linear and curved
array probes with a limited field were developed.
Ultrasound transducers at the tip of an endoscope
can be used to evaluate the bowel wall. The advantage
is both, an endoscopic and ultrasound image, thus
allowing investigation of small abnormalities in the
bowel wall. The rubber balloon filled with water is
not suitable for the anal canal, as it is compressed
and twisted into the rotating probe. A hard, water-
filled cone is necessary to image the anal canal.
Several industries provide ultrasound machines.
Rigid rotating endoprobes with a 360° view are
preferable. Rigid mechanical probes are provided
by Bruel & Kjaer Medical (Herlev, Denmark) with a
focal range of 5–16 MHz with 360° view, and by
Aloka (7.5–12.5 MHz, 270°, Tokyo, Japan). The flex-
ible endoscopic Olympus (Tokyo, Japan) radial
scanner (7.5–12 MHz) has a 360° view. Flexible
endoscopic sector scanners are by Pentax/Hitachi
(sector scanner 100°, 5 and 7.5 MHz) (Tokyo, Japan)
and Olympus (180°, 7.5 MHz). Bruel & Kjaer Med-
ical has also developed software to construct a 3D
image.
Performance
Generally, the patient is in the left lateral position. A
digital rectal examination is mandatory to determine
the presence of possible abnormalities (stenosis,
painful lesion, tumor). The rigid probes are covered
for hygienic reasons with a condom filled with ultra-
sound gel. Then the probe is covered with a gel on the
outside and gently introduced into the rectum, fol-
lowing the anorectal angle. Landmarks are the
prostate, vagina, and PR muscle. Then the probe is
slowly withdrawn and enters the anal canal, were the
anatomy, as described above, can be seen.
EUS Two-Dimensional Versus Three-Dimensional
Imaging
With 3D reconstruction, it is not only possible to
view the transversal image but also the longitudinal
and sagittal images. Subsequently, it is possible to
measure the length and volume of the anal sphinc-
ters. Men have a longer anterior EAS than do women
[37]. Volume measurement has been very disap-
pointing; reproducibility of volume measurement is
moderate [38, 39]. No difference has been found in
the volume of the EAS of women with faecal inconti-
nence and healthy women [38, 39], and subsequent-
ly, this is not a tool to be used to demonstrate
sphincter atrophy [40]. Sphincter length and aspect
are far more promising markers to show EAS atro-
phy [41]. Demonstration of sphincter defects may be
improved by 3D imaging [42]. The most impressive
feature of 3D EUS is the ease of viewing the anal
sphincter from all different angles and therefore
obtaining a better view and insight into the local
pathology.
Accuracy of Demonstrating Anorectal Sphincter
Injury with Anal Ultrasound
EUS remains the gold standard in delineating the
anatomy of the PR muscle and anal sphincter com-
plex [18, 21, 43–45]. EUS can visualize defects, scar-
ring, thinning and thickening, difference in
echogenicity, and other local alterations. The
defects should be described, indicating their loca-
tion (IAS, EAS, PR muscle), their size longitudinal-
ly (total, proximal, distal), and their circumference
(degrees). Some semantic problems exist concern-
disruption of the IAS or EAS are described as
defects. Tears are defined by interruption of the fib-
rillar echo texture; scaring is defined more by loss
of normal architecture, with usually low reflective-
ness [46]. Endosonography demonstrates sphincter
defects with high accuracy [37, 47–52]. Sensitivity
and specificity can reach almost 100%. The
described defects are confirmed during surgery.
There is a good reproducibility for sphincter defects
and anal sphincter thickness [37, 53–56]. For the
IAS, the agreement is higher than for the EAS.
Because of its accuracy and simplicity, endosonog-
raphy has replaced electromyographical sphincter
mapping, which is no more reliable than EUS [50,
52, 57, 58], provides no information about the IAS,
and is an invasive, painful, and time-consuming
technique [52].
Sphincter defect size correlates with faecal incon-
tinence severity, and postoperative sphincter repair
failure correlates with the remaining size of the
sphincter defect [59]. Concomitant neuropathy may
trouble that relationship [60, 61]. However, finding a
sphincter defect does not necessarily mean that it is
the cause of faecal incontinence, as many people have
sphincter defects without faecal incontinence [62].
On the other hand, patients with faecal incontinence
can have intact sphincters, and pudendal or auto-
nomic neuropathy leading to sphincter atrophy is
then the cause [2, 13].
When there is clinical faecal incontinence in
women with obstetric trauma with low anal pressures
and significant sphincter defect, sphincter repair
110
R.J.F. Felt-Bersma
Chapter 10 Imaging of Faecal Incontinence with Endoanal Ultrasound
may be considered. When there is no sphincter
defect, pudendal neuropathy is the cause of the faecal
incontinence, provided that there is no diarrhea or a
small rectal capacity [63]. The difficulty comes when
there is a small sphincter defect with moderate anal
sphincter pressure. Generally, a defect smaller than
25% of the circumference is not considered signifi-
cant for anal sphincter repair. Another problem is
very low sphincter pressures and possible signs of
atrophy and a defect of 25%: the very low pressures
and signs of atrophy suggest concomitant serious
neuropathy, which interferes with successful surgery.
Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency (PNTML)
measurements are not conclusive either [64], and
decisions cannot be made on the results of these
measurements.
Internal Anal Sphincter Abnormalities
The majority of lesions of the IAS are due to iatro-
genic and obstetric injuries, often in combination
with injuries to the EAS, leading to faecal inconti-
nence. Smaller lesions leading to minor faecal incon-
tinence or soiling are due to hemorrhoidectomy or
mucosal prolapsectomy. Manual anal dilatation [65]
or lateral internal sphincterotomy [66–68] are noto-
rious and have been associated with faecal inconti-
nence in 27% and 50% of patients, respectively. Fis-
tula surgery can cause faecal incontinence in up to
60% of cases [69]. Fortunately, not all traumatic
sphincter defects lead to faecal incontinence or soil-
ing. In a study of 50 patients after haemorrhoidecto-
my (24), fistulectomy (18), and internal sphinctero-
tomy (8), 23 (46%) had a defect of the anal sphincter
(13 IAS, one EAS, nine combined defect) three after
hemorrhoidectomy, 13 after fistulectomy, and seven
after internal sphincterotomy. Seven patients (30%)
had symptoms, and they all had a sphincter defect. In
the other 16 (70%), the sphincter defect did not pro-
duce symptoms [62].
Defects of the IAS are easily recognized due to
the prominent appearance of the IAS in the anal
canal, as the defects appear as hyperechoic breaks
in the hypoechogenic ring. The pattern of disrup-
tion is related to the type of surgery or trauma [70].
Manual dilatation will lead to several disruptions
or sometimes to a diffuse thinning of the IAS.
Patients after a lateral internal sphincterotomy will
have a single lateral defect associated with a thick-
ening of the remaining IAS due to retraction of the
remaining muscle (Fig. 3a–c) [65, 67]. After hem-
orrhoidectomy, defects can be seen where the hem-
orrhoids were removed. Fistula surgery leads to
combined defects of IAS and EAS in the fistula
tract.
111
a
b
Fig. 3a–c. Internal anal sphincter defect (ISD) due to lateral
internal sphincterotomy. a Frontal view of a dorsolateral
left defect, b frontal and c coronal view of a right lateral ISD.
R rectum, IAS internal anal sphincter, EAS external anal
sphincter, D defect
c
Reports have appeared about rare causes of faecal
incontinence, such as primary IAS degeneration in
passive faecal incontinence [13] and sclerosis of the
IAS in mixed connective tissue disease [71] and sys-
temic sclerosis [72]. In these patients, there is diffuse
thinning (<0.2 mm) of the IAS.
External Anal Sphincter Abnormalities
The most frequent cause of faecal incontinence is an
obstetric injury to the EAS. The typical appearance
of this EAS defect is an anterior break in the circum-
ferential integrity of the hyperechogenic band to a
more hypoechogenic aspect (Figs. 4a, b; 5a, b). This
corresponds to replacement of the normal striated
muscle with granulation tissue and fibrosis. With
vaginal EUS, the relationship with the vagina
becomes even more clear (Fig. 5b). Especially in
women, an anterior sphincter defect (irregular
mixed echogenic to hypoechogenic) must be well dif-
ferentiated from the natural gap between the PR
muscle in the upper anal canal (hypoechogenic;
smooth, regular edges). Surgical defects will be at the
location of the surgery.
There is wide variation in the incidence of clinical-
ly occult anal sphincter injuries diagnosed by EUS
after the first vaginal delivery [3, 7, 73–79]. For prim-
ipara, the risk of developing a sphincter tear is 25%,
and for subsequent deliveries, it is 4% [3, 80]. Faecal
incontinence develops in 25% [80] of such deliveries.
Instrumental delivery (forceps more than vacuum
extraction), the second stage of labor, and high birth
weight are associated with increased risk of anal
sphincter injury [73, 80, 81]. In patients with perianal
fistula with external fistula openings, the fistula tract
can be differentiated from a defect by becoming
hyperechogenic after introduction of hydrogen per-
oxide [82]. EAS atrophy detection with EUS is also
possible, but the technique requires more research
(see Chapter 28).
Puborectalis Muscle Abnormalities
As with the EAS, the PR muscle is a striated muscle
and can also acquire defects or become atrophic.
Defects of the PR muscle are rare and are related to
dramatic anorectal trauma, such as speedboat or
traffic accidents (Fig. 6a). Sometimes with a high
anorectal fistula, a defect of the PR muscle can be
seen (Fig. 6b, c). A greater shortening of the PR mus-
cle during contraction has been observed in patients
with faecal incontinence [83].
112
R.J.F. Felt-Bersma
a
b
Fig. 4a, b. Combined defect of internal and external anal sphincter. a Frontal. b Lateral view. R rectum, IAS internal anal
sphincter, EAS external anal sphincter, D defect
Chapter 10 Imaging of Faecal Incontinence with Endoanal Ultrasound
EUS Versus Endoanal MRI
Several studies compared the diagnostic accuracy of
EUS and endoanal MRI regarding anal sphincter
defects. One report suggests that endosonography is
superior to MRI in diagnosing IAS injury but equal in
diagnosing EAS defects [84]. Interobserver agree-
ment for sphincter defects in MRI is moderate and
less than that reported for EUS [85]. Generally, detec-
tion by EUS is equal to that by MRI [40, 41, 86, 87],
although some claim MRI is superior in imaging the
EAS [88, 89]. In patients with anorectal disorders,
EUS provides more information and can be per-
formed during surgery [90]. Some variability can be
explained by differences in study design, patient
population, physician experience, and interest in the
techniques used. Both techniques are very reliable
methods and can be used to demonstrate sphincter
defects. It has been reported that MRI is the preferred
tool to demonstrate sphincter atrophy [91, 92] How-
ever, with anal endosonography, it is also possible to
detect EAS atrophy, and the technique compares well
with MRI findings [41] (see Chapter 28).
EUS and Anal Manometry
Anal manometry selects patients with low pressures in
anal incontinence; however, there is an overlap
between healthy individuals and patients with inconti-
nence [93]. Anal manometry correlates rather poorly
with the presence of sphincter defects [94–98]. This is
obvious because anal manometry reflects only the
functional result – that is, low anal pressures – but not
the cause (sphincter defect or neuropathy). On the
other hand, EUS demonstrates a sphincter defect
regardless of its functional results on anal pressures.
However, it seems logical that a large defect will result
in low anal pressures. Both anal manometry and EUS
are incapable of predicting clinical outcome in patients
with faecal incontinence [99]. However, the indication
to perform EUS is demonstration of a sphincter defect.
The relationship between anal pressures measured
with anal manometry and anal sphincter features
measured with EUS is not clear. Sphincter defects of
IAS and EAS correlated with maximal basal and
squeeze pressure, respectively [100]. A correlation was
found between posterior sphincter length measured on
3D EUS and sphincter length measured during manom-
etry in healthy subjects and between IAS volume and
resting anal pressure in incontinent women [40].
EUS and Surgery
Patients with a significant sphincter defect without
clinically obvious neuropathy and/or atrophy can
thus be selected for sphincter repair. Endosonogra-
phy is also useful in selecting patients with persistent
113
ab
Fig. 5a, b. External anal sphincter defect. a Rectal image. b Vaginal image. Arrows indicate large defect. V vagina, R rectum,
IAS internal anal sphincter, EAS external anal sphincter, D defect
sphincter defects after failed repair, as the presence
of such a rest defect correlates with poor clinical out-
come [101–110]. Repeat repair can improve conti-
nence score [81]. Sometimes, a typical overlap sign
may be observed after sphincter repair [111].
Conclusion
EUS is a very good tool to demonstrate anal sphinc-
ter defects of both the EUS and the IAS. The size of
the sphincter defect in combination with other
anorectal function tests results (low anal pressures,
normal rectal, compliance) without diarrhea form an
indication to perform an anal sphincter repair. EUS
has good reproducibility, compares well with sur-
gery, and has equal results with EAS defects and pos-
sibly better results with IAS defects than does MRI.
Atrophy detection is also possible but requires more
research. Three-dimensional EUS gives more insight
into the anatomy and therefore may demonstrate
defects better, but it is probably more the ease of
viewing the image. Volume measurements for the
anal sphincters have no value.
References
1. Parks AG, Swash M, Urich H (1977) Sphincter dener-
vation in anorectal incontinence and rectal prolapse.
Gut 18:656–665
2. Snooks SJ, Swash M, Setchell M, Henry MM (1984)
Injury to innervation of pelvic floor sphincter muscu-
lature in childbirth. Lancet 2(8402):546–550
3. Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Hudson CN et al (1993) Anal-
sphincter disruption during vaginal delivery. New
Engl J Med 329:1905–1911
4. Kamm MA (1994) Obstetric damage and faecal incon-
tinence. Lancet 344:730–733
5. Oberwalder M, Connor J, Wexner SD (2003) Meta-
analysis to determine the incidence of obstetric anal
sphincter damage. Br J Surg 90:1333–1337
6. Zetterstrom J, Lopez A, Holmstrom B et al (2003)
Obstetric sphincter tears and anal incontinence: an
114
R.J.F. Felt-Bersma
ab
c
Fig. 6a–c. a Defect of puborectalis (PR) muscle after a trau-
ma. Arrows indicate border of defect. b Transversal and c
lateral view of a defect in PR muscle after high fistulotomy.
PR puborectal muscle, R rectum, D defect
Chapter 10 Imaging of Faecal Incontinence with Endoanal Ultrasound
observational follow-up study. Acta Obstet Gynecol
Scand 82:921–928
7. Abramowitz L, Sobhani I, Ganansia R et al (2000) Are
sphincter defects the cause of anal incontinence after
vaginal delivery? Results of a prospective study. Dis
Colon Rectum 43:590–596
8. Benifla JL, Abramowitz L, Sobhani I et al (2000) Post-
partum sphincter rupture and anal incontinence:
prospective study with 259 patients. Gynecol Obstet
Fertil 28:15–22
9. Felt-Bersma RJ, Koorevaar M, Strijers RL, Cuesta MA
(1995) Unsuspected sphincter defects shown by anal
endosonography after anorectal surgery. A prospec-
tive study. Dis Colon Rectum 38:249–253
10. Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Nicholls RJ, Bartram CI (1994)
Prospective study of the extent of internal anal sphinc-
ter division during lateral sphincterotomy. Dis Colon
Rectum 37:1031–1033
11. Farouk R, Drew P, Duthie G et al (1996) Disruption of
the internal anal sphincter can occur after transanal
stapling. Br J Surg 83:1400
12. Silvis R, van Eekelen JW, Delemarre JB, Gooszen HG
(1995) Endosonography of the anal sphincter after
ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Relation with anal
manometry and fecal continence. Dis Colon Rectum
38:383–388
13. Vaizey CJ, Kamm MA, Bartram CI (1997) Primary
degeneration of the internal anal sphincter as a cause
of passive faecal incontinence. Lancet 349:612–615
14. Faltin DL, Boulvain M, Irion O et al (2000) Diagnosis
of anal sphincter tears by postpartum endosonogra-
phy predict fecal incontinence. Obstet Gynecol
95:643–647
15. Faridi A, Willis S, Schelzig P et al (2002) Anal sphinc-
ter injury during vaginal delivery – an argument for
cesarean section on request? J Perinat Med 30:379–387
16. Eckardt VF, Jung B, Fischer B, Lierse W et al (
1994)
Anal endosonography in healthy subjects and patients
with idiopathic fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum
37:235–242
17. Law PJ, Bartram CI (1989) Anal endosonography.
Technique and normal anatomy. Gastrointest Radiol
14:349–353
18. Nielsen MB, Pedersen JF, Hauge C et al (1991)
Endosonography of the anal sphincter: Findings in
healthy volunteers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 157:1199–1202
19. Tjandra JJ, Milsom JW, Stolfi VM et al (1992) Endolu-
minal ultrasound defines anatomy of the anal canal
and pelvic floor. Dis Colon Rectum 35:465–470
20. Nielsen MB, Hauge C, Rasmussen OO et al (1992) Anal
sphincter size measured by endosonography in
healthy volunteers. Effect of age, sex and parity. Acta
Radiol 33:453–456
21. Burnett SJ, Bartram CI (1991) Endosonographic varia-
tions in the normal internal anal sphincter. Int J Col-
orect Dis 6:2–4
22. Sultan AH, Nicholls RJ, Kamm MA et al (1993) Anal
endosonography and correlation with in vitro and in
vivo anatomy. Br J Surg 80:508–511
23. Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Hudson CN et al (1994)
Endosonography of the anal sphincters: normal anato-
my and comparison with manometry. Clin Radiol
49:368–374
24. Papachrysostomou M, Pye SD, Wild SR, Smith AN
(1993) Anal endosonography in asymptomatic sub-
jects. Scand J Gastroenterol 28:551–556
25. Gerdes B, Kohler HH, Zielke A et al (1997) The
anatomical basis of anal endosonography–a study in
postmortem specimens. Surg Endoscopy 11:986–990
26. Poen AC, Felt-Bersma RJF, Cuesta MA, Meuwissen
SGM (1997) Normal values and reproducibility of anal
endosonographic measurements. Eur J Ultrasound
6:103–110
27. Papachrysostomou M, Pye SD, Wild SR, Smith AN
(1994) Significance of the thickness of the anal sphinc-
ters with age and its relevance in faecal incontinence.
Scand J Gastroenterol 29:710–714
28. Nielsen MB, Pedersen JF (1996) Changes in the anal
sphincter with age. An endosonographic study. Acta
Radiol 37:357–361
29. Schafer R, Heyer T, Gantke B et al (1997) Anal
endosonography and manometry: comparison in
patients with defecation problems. Dis Colon Rectum
40:293–297
30. Gantke B, Schafer A, Enck P, Lubke HJ (1993) Sono-
graphic, manometric, and myographic evaluation of
the anal sphincters morphology and function. Dis
Colon Rectum 36:1037–1041
31. Emblem R, Dhaenens G, Stien R et al (1994) The
importance of anal endosonography in the evaluation
of idiopathic fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum
37:42–48
32. Klosterhalfen B, Offner F, Topf N et al (1990) Sclerosis
of the internal anal sphincter–A process of aging. Dis
Colon Rectum 33:606–609
33. Poen AC, Felt-Bersma RJF, Cuesta MA, Meuwissen
SGM (1999) Anal endosonography in haemorroidal
disease: do anatomical changes have clinical implica-
tions? Colorectal Dis 1:146–150
34. Loder PB, Kamm MA, Nicholls RJ et al (1994) Pathol-
ogy, pathophysiology and aetiology. Br J Surg
81:946–954
35. Lunniss PJ, Phillips R (1992) Anatomy and function of
the anal longitudinal muscle. Br J Surg 79:882–884
36. Poen AC, Felt-Bersma RJF, Cuesta MA, Meuwissen
SGM (1998) Vaginal endosonography of the anal
sphincter complex is important in the diagnosis of fae-
cal incontinence and perianal sepsis. Br J Surg
85:359–363
37. Gold DM, Bartram CI, Halligan S et al (1999) Three-
dimensional endoanal sonography in assessing anal
canal injury. Br J Surg 86:365–370
38. West RL, Felt-Bersma RJ, Hansen BE et al (2005) Vol-
ume measurements of the anal sphincter complex in
healthy controls and fecal-incontinent patients with a
three-dimensional reconstruction of endoanal ultra-
sonography images. Dis Colon Rectum 48:540–548
39. Gregory WT, Boyles SH, Simmons K et al (2006) Exter-
nal anal sphincter volume measurements using 3-
dimensional endoanal ultrasound. Am J Obstet
Gynecol 194:1243–1248
40. West RL, Dwarkasing S, Briel JW et al (2005) Can
three-dimensional endoanal ultrasonography detect
external anal sphincter atrophy? A comparison with
endoanal magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Colorec-
tal Dis 20:328–333
115
41. Cazemier M, Terra MP, Stoker J et al (2006) Atrophy
and defects detection of the external anal sphincter:
comparison between three-dimensional anal
endosonography and endoanal magnetic resonance
imaging. Dis Colon Rectum 49:20–27
42. Christensen AF, Nyhuus B, Nielsen MB, Christensen H
(2005) Three-dimensional anal endosonography may
improve diagnostic confidence of detecting damage to
the anal sphincter complex. Br J Radiol 78:308–311
43. Bartram CI (2003) Ultrasound. In: Bartram CI, deLan-
cy JOL (eds) Imaging pelvic floor disorders. Springer
Berlin Heidelberg New York
44. Williams AB, Cheetham MJ, Bartram CI et al (2000)
Gender differences in the longitudinal pressure profile
of the anal canal related to anatomical structure as
demonstrated on three-dimensional anal endosonog-
raphy. Br J Surg 87:1674–1679
45. Kumar A, Scholefield JH (2000) Endosonography of the
anal canal and rectum. World J Surg 24:208–115. Review
46. Rociu E, Stoker J, Zwamborn AW, Lameris JS (1999)
Endoanal MR imaging of the anal sphincter in fecal
incontinence. Radiographics S171–177
47. Meyenberger C, Bertschinger P, Zala GF, Buchmann P
(1996) Anal sphincter defects in fecal incontinence:
correlation between endosonography and surgery.
Endoscopy 28:217–224
48. Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Talbot IC et al (1994) Anal
endosonography for identifying external sphincter
defects confirmed histologically. Br J Surg 81:463–465
49. Romano G, Rotondano G, Esposito P et al (1996)
External anal sphincter defects: correlation between
pre-operative anal endosonography and intraopera-
tive findings. Br J Radiol 69:6–9
50. Burnett SJ, Speakman CT, Kamm MA, Bartram CI
(1991) Confirmation of endosonographic detection of
external anal sphincter defects by simultaneous elec-
tromyographic mapping. Br J Surg 78:448–450
51. Deen KI, Kumar D, Williams JG et al (1993) Anal
sphincter defects: Correlation between endoanal ultra-
sound and surgery. Ann Surg 218:201–205
52. Tjandra JJ, Milsom JW, Schroeder T, Fazio VW (1993)
Endoluminal ultrasound is preferable to electromyog-
raphy in mapping anal sphincteric defects. Dis Colon
Rectum 36:689–692
53. Poen AC, Felt-Bersma RJF, Cuesta MA, Meuwissen
SGM (1997) Normal values and reproducibility of anal
endosonographic measurements. Eur J Ultrasound
6:103–110
54. Falk PM, Blatchford GJ, Cali RL et al (1994) Transanal
ultrasound and manometry in the evaluation of fecal
incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 37:468–472
55. Pinta TM, Kylanpaa ML, Salmi TK et al (2004) Prima-
ry sphincter repair: are the results of the operation
good enough? Dis Colon Rectum 47:18–23
56. Fritsch H, Brenner E, Lienemann A, Ludwikowski B
(2002) Anal sphincter complex: reinterpreted mor-
phology and its clinical relevance. Dis Colon Rectum
45:188–194
57. Law PJ, Kamm MA, Bartram CI (1990) A comparison
between electromyography and anal endosonography
in mapping external anal sphincter defects. Dis Colon
Rectum 33:370–373
58. Enck P, von GHJ, Schafer A et al (1996) Comparison of
anal sonography with conventional needle elec-
tromyography in the evaluation of anal sphincter
defects. Am J Gastroenterol 91:2539–2543
59. Felt-Bersma RJ, Cuesta MA, Koorevaar M (1996) Anal
sphincter repair improves anorectal function and
endosonographic image. A prospective clinical study.
Dis Colon Rectum 39:878–885
60. Voyvodic F, Rieger NA, Skinner S et al (2003)
Endosonographic imaging of anal sphincter injury:
does the size of the tear correlate with the degree of
dysfunction? Dis Colon Rectum 46:735–741
61. Felt-Bersma RJ (2004
) Comment on Voyvodic et al
(2003) Endosonographic imaging of anal sphincter
injury. Dis Colon Rectum 47(4):546–547
62. Felt-Bersma RJ, van Baren R,Koorevaar M et al (1995)
Unsuspected sphincter defects shown by anal
endosonography after anorectal surgery. A prospec-
tive study. Dis Colon Rectum 38:249–253
63. Felt-Bersma RJ, Sloots CE, Poen AC et al (2000) Rectal
compliance as a routine measurement: extreme vol-
umes have direct clinical impact and normal volumes
exclude rectum as a problem. Dis Colon Rectum
43:1732–1738
64. Riccard R, Melgren AF, Madoff RD et al (2006) The
utility of pudendal nerve terminal latencies in idio-
pathic incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 49(6):852–857
65. Speakman CT, Burnett SJ, Kamm MA, Bartram CI
(1991) Sphincter injury after anal dilatation demon-
strated by anal endosonography. Br J Surg
78:1429–1430
66. Khubchandani IT, Reed JF (1989) Sequelae of internal
sphincterotomy for chronic fissure in ano. Br J Surg
76:431–434
67. Tjandra JJ, Han WR, Ooi BS et al (2001) Faecal incon-
tinence after lateral internal sphincterotomy is often
associated with coexisting occult sphincter defects: a
study using endoanal ultrasonography. ANZ J Surg
71:598–602
68. Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Nicholls RJ, Bartram CI (1994)
Prospective study of the extent of internal anal sphinc-
ter division during lateral sphincterotomy. Dis Colon
Rectum 37(10):1031–1033
69. Kennedy HL, Zegarra JP (1990) Fistulotomy without
external sphincter division for high anal fistulae. Br J
Surg 77:898–901
70. Farouk R, Bartolo DC (1994) The use of endoluminal
ultrasound in the assessment of patients with faecal
incontinence. J R Coll Surg Edinb 39:312
–318
71. Engel AF, Kamm MA, Talbot IC (1994) Progressive
systemic sclerosis of the internal anal sphincter lead-
ing to passive faecal incontinence. Gut 35:857–859
72. Daniel F, De Parades V, Cellier C (2005) Abnormal
appearance of the internal anal sphincter at ultra-
sound: a specific feature of progressive systemic scle-
rosis? Gastroenterol Clin Biol 29:597–599
73. Handa VL, Danielsen BH, Gilbert WM (2001) Obstet-
ric anal sphincter lacerations. Obstet Gynecol
98:225–230
74. de Parades V, Etienney I, Thabut D et al (2004) Anal
sphincter injury after forceps delivery: myth or reality?
A prospective ultrasound study of 93 females. Dis
Colon Rectum 47:24–34
75. Lee SJ, Park JW (2000) Follow-up evaluation of the
116
R.J.F. Felt-Bersma
Chapter 10 Imaging of Faecal Incontinence with Endoanal Ultrasound
effect of vaginal delivery on the pelvic floor. Dis Colon
Rectum 43:1550–1555
76. Snooks SJ, Swash M, Mathers SE, Henry MM (1990)
Effect of vaginal delivery on the pelvic floor: a 5-year
follow-up. Br J Surg 77:1358–1360
77. Martinez Hernandez Magro P, Villanueva Saenz E,
Jaime Zavala M et al (2003) Endoanal sonography in
assessment of fecal incontinence following obstetric
trauma. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 22:616–621
78. Deen KI, Kumar D, Williams JG et al (1993) The preva-
lence of anal sphincter defects in faecal incontinence:
a prospective endosonic study. Gut 34:685–688
79. Williams AB, Bartram CI, Halligan S et al (2001) Anal
sphincter damage after vaginal delivery using three-
dimensional endosonography. Obstet Gynecol
97:770–775
80. Donnelly V, Fynes M, Campbell D et al (1998) Obstet-
ric events leading to anal sphincter damage. Obstet
Gynecol 92:955–961
81. Poen AC, Felt-Bersma RJ, Strijers RL et al (1998)
Third-degree obstetric perineal tear: long-term clini-
cal and functional results after primary repair. Br J
Surg 85:1433–1438
82. Poen AC, Felt-Bersma RJ, Eijsbouts QA et al (1998)
Hydrogen-peroxide-enhanced transanal ultrasound in
the assessment of fistula-in-ano. Dis Colon Rectum
41:1147–1152
83. Tankova L, Draganov V, Damyanov N (2001)
Endosonography for assessment of anorectal changes
in patients with fecal incontinence. Eur J Ultrasound
12:221–225
84. Malouf AJ, Williams AB, Halligan S et al (2000)
Prospective assessment of accuracy of endoanal MR
imaging and endosonography in patients with fecal
incontinence. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:741–745
85. Malouf AJ, Halligan S, Williams AB et al (
2001)
Prospective assessment of interobserver agreement for
endoanal MRI in fecal Incontinence. Abdom Imaging
26:76–78
86. Pinta T, Kylanpaa ML, Luukkonen P et al (2004) Anal
incontinence: diagnosis by endoanal US or endovagi-
nal MRI. Eur Radiol 14:1472–1477
87. Williams AB, Bartram CI, Halligan S et al (2002)
Endosonographic anatomy of the normal anal canal
compared with endocoil magnetic resonance imaging.
Dis Colon Rectum 45:176–183
88. Rociu E, Stoker J, Eijkemans MJ, Lameris JS (2000)
Normal anal sphincter anatomy and age- and sex-
related variations at high-spatial-resolution endoanal
MR imaging. Radiology 217:395–401
89. Beets-Tan RG, Morren GL, Beets GL et al (2001) Mea-
surement of anal sphincter muscles: endoanal US,
endoanal MR imaging, or phased-array MR imaging?
A study with healthy volunteers. Radiology 220:81–89
90. Jones NM, Humphreys MS, Goodman TR et al (2003)
The value of anal endosonography compared with
magnetic resonance imaging following the repair of
anorectal malformations. Pediatr Radiol 33:183–185
91. Briel JW, Zimmerman DD, Stoker J et al (2000) Rela-
tionship between sphincter morphology on endoanal
MRI and histopathological aspects of the external anal
sphincter. Int J Colorectal Dis 15:87–90
92. Terra MP, Deutekom M, Beets-Tan RG et al (2006)
Relationship between external anal sphincter atro-
phy at endoanal magnetic resonance imaging and
clinical, functional, and anatomic characteristics in
patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum
49:668–678
93. Felt-Bersma R, Gort G, Meuwissen S (1991) Normal
values in anal manometry and rectal sensation: A
problem of range. Hepato Gastroenterol 38:444–449
94. Burnett SJ, Spence Jones C, Speakman CT et al (1991)
Unsuspected sphincter damage following childbirth
revealed by anal endosonography. Br J Radiol 64:
225–227
95. Felt-Bersma RJF, Cuesta MA, Koorevaar M et al (1992)
Anal endosonography: Relationship with anal
manometry and neurophysiologic tests. Dis Colon
Rectum 35:944–949
96. Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Talbot IC et al (1994) Anal
endosonography for identifying external sphincter
defects confirmed histologically. Br J Surg 81:463–465
97. Nielsen MB, Hauge C, Pedersen JF, Christiansen J
(1993) Endosonographic evaluation of patients with
anal incontinence: Findings and influence on surgical
management. AJR Am J Roentgenol 160:771–775
98. Rieger NA, Sweeney JL, Hoffmann DC et al (1996)
Investigation of fecal incontinence with endoanal
ultrasound. Dis Colon Rectum 39:860–864
99. Hill K, Fanning S, Fennerty MB, Faigel DO (2006)
Endoanal ultrasound compared to anorectal manome-
try for the evaluation of fecal incontinence: a study of
the effect these tests have on clinical outcome. Dig Dis
Sci 51:235–240
100. Barthet M, Bellon P, Abou E et al (2002) Anal
endosonography for assessment of anal incontinence
with a linear probe: relationships with clinical and
manometric features. Int J Colorectal Dis 17:123–128
101. Felt-Bersma RJ, Cuesta MA, Koorevaar M (1996) Anal
sphincter repair improves anorectal function and
endosonographic image. A prospective clinical study.
Dis Colon Rectum 39:878–885
102. Nielsen MB, Dammegaard L, Pedersen JF (1994)
Endosonographic assessment of the anal sphincter
after surgical reconstruction. Dis Colon Rectum
37:434–438
103. Poen AC, Felt-Bersma RJ, Cuesta MA, Meuwissen SGM
(1998) Third degree perineal rupture: long term clini-
cal and functional results after primary repair. Br J
Surg 85:1433–1438
104. Sitzler PJ, Thomson JP (1996) Overlap repair of dam-
aged anal sphincter. A single surgeon’s series. Dis
Colon Rectum 39:1356–1360
105. Engel AF, Kamm MA, Sultan AH et al (1994
) Anterior
anal sphincter repair in patients with obstetric trauma.
Br J Surg 81:1231–1234
106. Ternent CA, Shashidharan M, Blatchford GJ et al
(1997) Transanal ultrasound and anorectal physiology
findings affecting continence after sphincteroplasty.
Dis Colon Rectum 40:462–467
107. Starck M, Bohe M, Valentin L (2006) The extent of
endosonographic anal sphincter defects after primary
repair of obstetric sphincter tears increases over time
and is related to anal incontinence. Ultrasound Obstet
Gynecol 27:188–197
108. Allgayer H, Dietrich CF, Rohde W et al (2005) Prospec-
117
tive comparison of short- and long-term effects of
pelvic floor exercise/biofeedback training in patients
with fecal incontinence after surgery plus irradiation
versus surgery alone for colorectal cancer: clinical,
functional and endoscopic/endosonographic findings.
Scand J Gastroenterol 40:1168–1175
109. Norderval S, Oian P, Revhaug A, Vonen B (2005) Anal
incontinence after obstetric sphincter tears: outcome of
anatomic primary repairs. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1055–1061
110. Giordano P, Renzi A, Efron J et al (2002) Previous
sphincter repair does not affect the outcome of repeat
repair. Dis Colon Rectum 45:635–640
111. Savoye-Collet C, Savoye G, Koning E et al (1999) Anal
endosonography after sphincter repair: specific pat-
terns related to clinical outcome. Abdom Imaging
24:569–573
118
R.J.F. Felt-Bersma
Introduction
Fecal incontinence, the inability to deliberately con-
trol the anal sphincter, is a common disease and may
affect up to 20% of the age group above 65 years [1].
Fecal incontinence has a substantial impact on qual-
ity of life. It is a socially disabling problem that pre-
vents up to one third of patients from seeking med-
ical advice for it. The most common causes include
traumatic (obstetric, surgical) sphincter defects, neu-
rogenic dysfunction of the musculature of the pelvic
floor, and rectal prolapse. The prevalence of fecal
incontinence in women is eight times higher than in
men [2]. The most common cause in women is child-
birth, during which the sphincter muscles are com-
monly damaged [3–5]. Traumatic rupture of the anal
sphincters may result in immediate-onset fecal
incontinence. Pudendal neuropathy, caused by
stretching the branches of the pudendal nerve to the
sphincter and levator ani as the fetal head pushes
down on the pelvic floor to dilate the introitus, leads
to delayed-onset incontinence. Following vaginal
delivery, the pudendal nerve terminal motor laten-
cies (PNTML) are increased for about 6 months, and
there is a fall in squeeze pressure regardless of
sphincter damage [6]. Nerve damage appears to be
cumulative, whereas direct sphincter damage most
likely occurs in the first delivery. An occult sphincter
defect may precipitate overt symptoms later as the
effects of menopause, neuropathy, and muscle loss
accumulate. Indeed, in 80% of affected women, an
obstetric trauma is present. Sultan et al. [4] demon-
strated that 35% of primiparous and 44% of multi-
parous women show defects of the internal and/or
external sphincter muscles after vaginal delivery.
One third of these women also have direct distur-
bances of anal continence.
Diabetes may be associated with profound auto-
nomic neuropathy, leading to dysfunction of the rec-
tum and the sphincter muscles. Abnormal thinning
of the internal sphincter is common and of unknown
etiology. Pelvic floor descent is common with
advanced age. It may be secondary to prolonged
straining, and the condition has been considered to
cause primary damage to the pudendal nerves by
stretching [7]. Fecal incontinence may be divided
into passive, where leakage is the main problem, and
urge, where stool cannot be held back. The passive
form is more likely to be due to internal damage,
while urge incontinence can be attributed to external
sphincter damage.
In treating fecal incontinence, the physician can
choose from several modalities, depending on local-
ization of the impairment. Isolated external sphinc-
ter defects can be treated conservatively by physical
therapy, including biofeedback. The pelvic floor may
be trained to take on the function of the arbitrary
sphincter muscle. In isolated internal sphincter
defects, physical therapy alone is unsuccessful
because other muscles cannot compensate for the
work of this involuntary muscle. Local measures and
a dietetic or medicinally triggered increase of fecal
consistency are necessary to obtain a good quality of
life. Patients with sphincter damage may benefit
from surgical repair. To perform optimal surgery, an
accurate description of the position, extent, and type
of lesion is necessary. Postanal and sphincter repair
are the established operative techniques. Long-term
results of sphincter repair show success rates of
50–75%, although this technique repairs a circum-
scribed defect with intact surrounding muscle [8].
Long-term results for postanal repair are not good
due to primary diffuse impairment of sphincter func-
tion [9]. Total pelvic repair has a success rate of 11%
[10].
Choice of an optimal therapy is determined on the
basis of proper assessment, especially accurate
images of the anal sphincter complex. Imaging meth-
ods applied are defecography, endoanal ultrasonog-
raphy, and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. Con-
ventional defecography is important for accurate
diagnosis of intussusception and rectoceles.
Endoanal ultrasound (EUS) is the preferred diagnos-
tic technique and has replaced the invasive method
of electromyography. Recently, MR imaging, espe-
cially with endorectal coils, has been shown to be
Imaging of Fecal Incontinence
Andrea Maier
11
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана