medric medric
[닫기]
잠시만 기다려 주세요. 로딩중입니다.

항문 직장 생리 검사로 변실금의 심한정도를 예측할 수 있는가?

Can We Predict the Severity of Fecal Incontinence by Preoperative Physiologic Test?

대한대장항문학회지 1997년 13권 4호 p.583 ~ 590
주재식 ( Joo Jae-Sik ) - 한국보훈병원 일반외과

손상호 ( Son Sang-Ho ) - 한국보훈병원 일반외과
한정기 ( Han Jung-Ki ) - 한국보훈병원 일반외과
손경수 ( Son Kyung-Soo ) - 한국보훈병원 일반외과
성상용 ( Sung Sang-Young ) - 한국보훈병원 일반외과
이호석 ( Lee Ho-Seok ) - 한국보훈병원 일반외과
최병수 ( Choi Byung-Soo ) - 한국보훈병원 일반외과
이성규 ( Lee Sung-Kyu ) - 한국보훈병원 일반외과

Abstract


Many kinds of different treatment options for fecal incontinence such as biofeedback therapy, anterior or posterior sphincteroplasty, pelvic floor repair, gracilis or gluteus muscle transposition have been introduced. However, appropriate indications for these treatment options have not yet been delineated up to now.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to access the preoperative severity of fecal incontinence by physiologic tests to give an idea that indications of appropriate selection criteria and parameters for assess the outcome could be simultaneously considered by preoperatively objective physiologic data.

Material and Methods: From January 3, 1997 to, August 1, 1997 all patients with fecal incontinence who visited colorectal clinic in the Department of Surgery, Korea Veterans Hospital, were classified into two groups according to the severity of fecal incontinence (0∼20): Group I (1 ∼9), Group II (10∼20) and compared them with the results of physiologic tests: anorectal manometry, endorectal ultrasound (ERU), cinedefecography, and pudendal nerve terminal motor latency (PNTML). Statistical analysis was performed by Student’s-t test, and Chi-square test and p<0.05 was considered significant.

Results: The number of GI was 25, and GII was 22. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of age (GI: 57.7±14.5, GII: 61.4±14.0years), gender (male: female, 19:6, 16:6), cause (neurogenic; 11/25 (GI),7/22(GII), postanal surgery; 6/25,6/22) obstetric trauma (2/25, 2/22), anal trauma (1/25, 1/22) diabetes melitus (1/25, 2/22), rectal prolapse (2/25, 1/22), and others (2/25, 3/22), duration of fecal incontinence (64.4±82.2, 48.7±65.3 months), high pressure zone (3.3±1.7, 3.5±1.4 cm), mean resting pressure (50.5±27.0, 51.9±18.7 cm H2O), maximal resting pressure (88.4± 50.6, 89.4±41.8 cm), maximal squeezing pressure (150.6±71.0, 129.7±59.5 cm H2O), rectoanal inhibitatory reflex (13/21, 8/21 positive), sensitivity (37.5± 15.2, 41.8±29.0 cc), compliance (19.0±14.5, 21.4±39.4 cc/cm H2O) in anorectal manometric findings, anal sphincter defect (13/21, 15/22 positive), size of defect
(60±26.30°, 71 ±30.8°/360°), thickness of the external anal sphincter (3.46±0.78, 3.84 ±1.02 cm), thickness of internal anal sphincter (1.58±0.79, 1.74±0.81 cm) in ERU, anorectal angle in rest (85.2±28.0°, 97±22.9°), squeeze (72±27.1°, 82 ± 19.7°), push (100±43.9°, 117.9±34.5°), length of perineal descent in rest (3.7±1.2, 3.6±1.7 cm), squeeze (2.9±1.5, 2.7±1.5 cm), push (7.9±3.5, 6.6±2.6 cm) in cinedefecography. However, rectal capacity in manometry (212.5±99.9, 155±51.5 cc, p<0.05), right PNTML (1.73±0.39, 2.71±0.83 ms, p<0.001), and left PNTML (1.83±0.43, 2.94±0.80 ms, p<0.001)
were significantly increased in GII compare to those of GI.

Conclusion: As the severity of fecal incontinence was increased, rectal capacity, right and, left PNTML were increased.

키워드

Fecal incontinence
원문 및 링크아웃 정보
  
등재저널 정보
KCI
KoreaMed
KAMS