The international anorectal physiology working group (IAPWG) recommendations: Standardized testing protocol and the London classification for disorders of anorectal function

Emma V Carrington, Henriette Heinrich, Charles H Knowles, Mark Fox, Satish Rao, Donato F Altomare, Adil E Bharucha, Rebecca Burgell, William D Chey, Guiseppe Chiarioni, Philip Dinning, Anton Emmanuel, Ridzuan Farouk, Richelle J F Felt-Bersma, Kee Wook Jung, Anthony Lembo, Allison Malcolm, Ravinder K Mittal, Franҫois Mion, Seung-Jae Myung, P Ronan O'Connell, Christian Pehl, Jose María Remes-Troche, R Matthew Reveille, Carolynne J Vaizey, Veronique Vitton, William E Whitehead, Reuben K Wong, S Mark Scott, All members of the International Anorectal Physiology Working Group, Emma V Carrington, Henriette Heinrich, Charles H Knowles, Mark Fox, Satish Rao, Donato F Altomare, Adil E Bharucha, Rebecca Burgell, William D Chey, Guiseppe Chiarioni, Philip Dinning, Anton Emmanuel, Ridzuan Farouk, Richelle J F Felt-Bersma, Kee Wook Jung, Anthony Lembo, Allison Malcolm, Ravinder K Mittal, Franҫois Mion, Seung-Jae Myung, P Ronan O'Connell, Christian Pehl, Jose María Remes-Troche, R Matthew Reveille, Carolynne J Vaizey, Veronique Vitton, William E Whitehead, Reuben K Wong, S Mark Scott, All members of the International Anorectal Physiology Working Group

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.

Keywords: anorectal function testing; anorectal manometry; balloon expulsion test; functional anorectal disorders; rectal sensory test.

Conflict of interest statement

Donato Altomare, William Chey, Phil Dinning, Anton Emmanuel, Ridzuan Farouk, Richelle Felt‐Bersma, Kee Wook Jung, Anthony Lembo, Malcolm, Seung Jae Myung, and Christian Pehl: None; Adil Bharucha holds patents jointly with Medtronic Inc and Medspira Inc; Rebecca Burgell is a speaker for Bayer and advisory board member for Allergan and Anatara; Emma Carrington is a consultant provided lectures and training courses for Laborie; Guiseppe Chiarioni is a member of the anorectal committee of the Rome Foundation; Mark Fox has received research funding from Covidien/Medtronic and speaker fees from Covidien/Medtronic, Sandhill, Medical Measurement Systems/Laborie, Reckitt Benckiser, and Mui Scientific; Henriette Heinrich is a member of Honorarium for teaching from Laborie; Charles Knowles is a consultant and invited speaker provided research grants for Medtronic; Allison; Franҫois Mion is a consultant for Laborie and lecturer for Medtronic; P. Ronan O’Connell is a consultant for Medtronic; Satish Rao is a advisory board member for and grant research support from Medtronic and Intone MV; Medtronics Incorporated and provided research grant support for advisory board; Jose María Remes Troche is a member of Advisory Board for Takeda, Asofarma, and Astra Zeneca, received grants from Takeda, Sanfer, and Newton Foundation, is a speaker for Takeda, Asofarma, Sanfer, Sanofi Aventis, and Carnot; R. Matthew Reveille is a consultant for Diversatek Healthcare; S Mark Scott is a consultant and provided lectures and training courses for Laborie; Carolynne Vaizey provided research grants, and is a consultant, speaker, and educator for Medtronic Inc, and an educator for THD; Veronique Vitton is a consultant for Medtronic; William Whitehead provided research support from Medspira Instruments, Palette Life Sciences, and Allergan, and is a consultant for Ironwood, Takeda, and Valeant; Reuben Wong is a consultant for Laborie/MMS and Takeda.

© 2019 The Authors. Neurogastroenterology & Motility published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic of the IAPWG standard protocol for high‐resolution anorectal manometry and rectal sensory testing. The balloon expulsion test should be performed either immediately before or after this protocol of anorectal manometry and rectal sensory testing
Figure 2
Figure 2
IAPWG classification part 1: Disorder of the rectoanal inhibitory reflex. For this and subsequent figures, the diagrams are color‐coded for clarity: (i) white boxes represent manometric findings or decision points; (ii) yellow boxes represent the resultant diagnosis; and (iii) pink boxes represent a 'negative/normal study'. aMinimum volume required to elicit reflex not established in the literature: failure to elicit a RAIR may be seen with low distending volumes in a large capacity rectum. bRAIR not elicited is a pattern not seen in health but may be found in asymptomatic patients following rectal resection / ileal pouch anal anastamosis, anal hypotonia, faecal loading or megarectum. cMay indicate the need for further investigation to exclude aganglionosis expecially in paediatric populations and adult patients with co‐existent megarectum/megacolon. All results to be interpreted in the context of adjunctive testing
Figure 3
Figure 3
IAPWG classification part 2: Disorders of anal tone and contractility. aThe functional anal canal length may be measured, as a short anal canal can be associated with anal hypotonia, but its use as a diagnostic criterion in isolation is unproven. bmay be associated with slow and/or ultraslow waves, however the clinical significance of these has not been established. cthis finding may have greater clinical significance in certain patient groups (e.g. chronic anal fissure, levator ani syndrome or proctalgia fugax). daddition of an abnormal cough response may indicate a more severe phenotype (whereas preservation may suggest a target for biofeedback) but its use as a diagnostic criterion is unproven. All results to be interpreted in context of adjunctive testing LLN: Lower limit of normal ULN
Figure 4
Figure 4
IAPWG classification part 3: Disorders of rectoanal coordination. arequires the use of both balloon expulsion test and anorectal manometry. bor impaired evacuation of contrast medium (prolonged evacuation end time and/or reduced percentage of contrast emptied) on alternative testing e.g. barium or MR defaecography. All results to be interpreted in context of adjunctive testing
Figure 5
Figure 5
IAPWG classification part 4: Disorders of rectal sensation. asensory parameters are: first constant sensation volume (FCSV), desire to defecate volume (DDV) and maximum tolerated volume (MTV). babnormal results may be further described using additional methods (e.g. barostat to assess compliance). All results to be interpreted in context of adjunctive testing

References

    1. Whitehead WE, Wald A, Diamant NE et al. Functional disorders of the anus and rectum. Gut. 1999;45(Suppl 2):Ii55‐Ii59.
    1. Carrington EV, Scott SM, Bharucha A, et al. Expert consensus document: Advances in the evaluation of anorectal function. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;15:309‐323.
    1. Scott SM, Gladman MA. Manometric, sensorimotor, and neurophysiologic evaluation of anorectal function. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2008;37(511–38):vii.
    1. Rao SS, Azpiroz F, Diamant N, Enck P, Tougas G, Wald A. Minimum standards of anorectal manometry. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2002;14:553‐559.
    1. Schouten WR, van Vroonhoven TJ. A simple method of anorectal manometry. Dis Colon Rectum. 1983;26:721‐724.
    1. Rao S, Hatfield R, Soffer E, Rao S, Beaty J, Conklin JL. Manometric tests of anorectal function in healthy adults. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:773‐783.
    1. Simpson RR, Kennedy ML, Nguyen MH, Dinning PG, Lubowski DZ. Anal manometry: a comparison of techniques. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006;49:1033‐1038.
    1. Heinrich H, Fruehauf H, Sauter M, et al. The effect of standard compared to enhanced instruction and verbal feedback on anorectal manometry measurements. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2013;25(230–7):e163.
    1. Barnett JL, Hasler WL, Camilleri M. American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on anorectal testing techniques. American Gastroenterological Association. Gastroenterology. 1999;116:732‐760.
    1. Azpiroz F, Enck P, Whitehead WE. Anorectal functional testing: review of collective experience. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:232‐240.
    1. Keighley M, Henry MM, Bartolo D, Mortensen N. Anorectal physiology measurement: report of a working party. Br J Surg. 1989;76:356‐357.
    1. Carrington EV, Heinrich H, Knowles CH, Rao SS, Fox M, Scott SM. Methods of anorectal manometry vary widely in clinical practice: Results from an international survey. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2017;n/a‐n/a.
    1. Kahrilas P, Ghosh S, Pandolfino J. Esophageal motility disorders in terms of pressure topography: the Chicago Classification. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2008;42:627‐635.
    1. . Accessed January 14, 2019
    1. Dinning PG, Carrington EV, Scott SM. The use of colonic and anorectal high‐resolution manometry and its place in clinical work and in research. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2015;27:1693‐1708.
    1. Lee TH, Bharucha AE. How to perform and interpret a high‐resolution anorectal manometry test. J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2016;22:46‐59.
    1. Jameson JS, Chia YW, Kamm MA, Speakman C, Chye YH, Henry MM. Effect of age, sex and parity on anorectal function. Br J Surg. 1994;81:1689‐1692.
    1. Townsend DC, Carrington EV, Grossi U, et al. Pathophysiology of fecal incontinence differs between men and women: a case‐matched study in 200 patients. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2016;28:1580‐1588.
    1. Sloots CE, Felt‐Bersma RJ, Cuesta MA, et al. Rectal visceral sensitivity in healthy volunteers: influences of gender, age and methods. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2000;12:361‐368.
    1. Chiarioni G, Kim SM, Vantini I, Whitehead WE. Validation of the balloon evacuation test: reproducibility and agreement with findings from anorectal manometry and electromyography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;12:2049‐2054.
    1. Mazor Y, Prott G, Jones M, Kellow J, Ejova A, Malcolm A. Anorectal physiology in health: A randomized trial to determine the optimum catheter for the balloon expulsion test. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2019;31:e13552.
    1. Ratuapli S, Bharucha AE, Harvey D, Zinsmeister AR. Comparison of rectal balloon expulsion test in seated and left lateral positions. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2013;25:e813‐e820.
    1. Palit S, Thin N, Knowles CH, Lunniss PJ, Bharucha AE, Scott SM. Diagnostic disagreement between tests of evacuatory function: a prospective study of 100 constipated patients. Neurogastroenterology and motility : the official journal of the European Gastrointestinal Motility Society. 2016;28:1589‐1598.
    1. Kahrilas PJ, Bredenoord AJ, Fox M, et al. The Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders, v3.0. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2015;27:160‐174.
    1. Knowles CH, Scott SM, Legg PE, et al. Level of classification performance of KESS (symptom scoring system for constipation) validated in a prospective series of 105 patients. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45:842‐843.
    1. Gyawali CP, Kahrilas PJ, Savarino E, et al. Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon Consensus. Gut. 2018;67:1351‐1362.
    1. Carlson DA, Ravi K, Kahrilas PJ, et al. Diagnosis of Esophageal Motility Disorders: Esophageal Pressure Topography vs. Conventional Line Tracing. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110:967–77; quiz 978.
    1. Rao S, Bharucha AE, Chiarioni G, et al. Functional Anorectal Disorders. Gastroenterology. 2016.
    1. Horrocks EJ, Chadi SA, Stevens NJ, Wexner SD, Knowles CH. Factors Associated With Efficacy of Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation for Fecal Incontinence, Based on Post‐Hoc Analysis of Data From a Randomized Trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;15(1915–1921):e2.
    1. Chiarioni G, Salandini L, Whitehead WE. Biofeedback benefits only patients with outlet dysfunction, not patients with isolated slow transit constipation. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:86‐97.
    1. Heinrich H, Sauter M, Fox M, et al. Assessment of Obstructive Defecation by High‐Resolution Anorectal Manometry Compared With Magnetic Resonance Defecography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13(1310–1317):e1.
    1. Prichard DO, Lee T, Parthasarathy G, Fletcher JG, Zinsmeister AR, Bharucha AE. High‐resolution Anorectal Manometry for Identifying Defecatory Disorders and Rectal Structural Abnormalities in Women. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;15:412‐420.
    1. Kanis JA, Melton LJ, Christiansen C, Johnston CC, Khaltaev N. The diagnosis of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 1994;9:1137‐1141.
    1. Carrington EV, Knowles CH, Grossi U, et al. High‐resolution Anorectal Manometry Measures Are More Accurate Than Conventional Measures in Detecting Anal Hypocontractility in Women With Fecal Incontinence. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018.
    1. Sauter M, Heinrich H, Fox M, et al. Toward more accurate measurements of anorectal motor and sensory function in routine clinical practice: validation of high‐resolution anorectal manometry and Rapid Barostat Bag measurements of rectal function. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2014;26:685‐695.
    1. Seo M, Joo S, Jung KW, Song EM, Rao S, Myung S‐J. New Metrics in High‐Resolution and High‐Definition Anorectal Manometry. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2018;20:57.
    1. Fox MR, Bredenoord AJ. Oesophageal high‐resolution manometry: moving from research into clinical practice. Gut. 2008;57:405‐423.
    1. Roman S, Huot L, Zerbib F, et al. High‐Resolution Manometry Improves the Diagnosis of Esophageal Motility Disorders in Patients With Dysphagia: A Randomized Multicenter Study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2016;111:372‐380.
    1. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:W1‐12.
    1. Rao SS. Dyssynergic defecation. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2001;30:97‐114.
    1. Ratuapli SK, Bharucha AE, Noelting J, Harvey DM, Zinsmeister AR. Phenotypic identification and classification of functional defecatory disorders using high‐resolution anorectal manometry. Gastroenterology. 2013;144(314–322):e2.
    1. Grossi U, Carrington EV, Bharucha AE, Horrocks EJ, Scott SM, Knowles CH. Diagnostic accuracy study of anorectal manometry for diagnosis of dyssynergic defecation. Gut. 2016;65:447‐455.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅