Electromyographic findings of paradoxical puborectalis contraction correlate poorly with cinedefecography

被引：10

作者：

C. Y. Yeh

A. Pikarsky

S. D. Wexner

M. K. Baig

A. Jain

E. G. Weiss

J. J. Nogueras

A. M. Vernava

机构：

[1] Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL 33331

来源：

Techniques in Coloproctology | 2003年 / 7卷 / 2期

关键词：

Anismus; Cinedefecography; Constipation; Electromyography; Paradoxical puborectalis contraction;

D O I：

10.1007/s10151-003-0013-9

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background: Both intra-anal sponge electromyography (SEMG) and needle electromyography (NEMG) are used to diagnose paradoxical puborectalis contraction (PPC). The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the correlation among SEMG and NEMG and cinedefecography (CD) in the diagnosis of PPC. Methods: Between 1992 and 1999, a total of 261 constipated patients underwent both CD and EMG: 64 had NEMG while 197 had SEMG. PPC was diagnosed by EMG when there was failure to achieve a significant decrease in electrical activity of the puborectalis muscle during attempted evacuation. CD criteria for PPC included lack of straightening of the anorectal angle or persistence of the puborectalis impression during evacuation. CD was considered diagnostic and EMG results were thus compared with those of CD. Agreement was calculated using the kappa statistics (K) for concordance. Results: Both NEMG and SEMG had low positive predictive rates (33% in NEMG, 28% in SEMG) and high negative predictive rates (91% in NEMG, and 78% in SEMG) when correlated with CD findings. Agreement between NEMG and CD was noted in 46 of 64 patients (72%, κ=0.274) while there was agreement between SEMG and CD in 120 of 197 patients (61%; κ=0.067); p>0.05 needle vs. sponge. Conclusion: Although both NEMG and SEMG have a low positive predictive values, they have high negative predictive value for PPC. Therefore, neither NEMG nor SEMG alone are optimal tests for diagnosing the presence of PPC.

引用

页码：77 / 81

页数：4

共 26 条

[1]

Wasserman I.F., Puborectalis syndrome (rectal stenosis due to anorectal spasm), Dis Colon Rectum, 7, pp. 87-98, (1964)

[2]

Voderholzer W.A., Neuhaus D.A., Klauser A.G., Travella K., Muller-Lissner S.A., Schindlbeck N.E., Paradoxical sphincter contraction is rarely indicative of anismus, Gut, 41, pp. 258-262, (1997)

[3]

Schouten W.R., Briel J.W., Auwerda J.J.A., Van Dam J.H., Gosselink M.J., Ginai A.Z., Hop W.C.J., Anismus: Fact or fiction?, Dis Colon Rectum, 40, pp. 1033-1041, (1997)

[4]

Pfeifer J., Teoh T.A., Salanga V.D., Agachan F., Wexner S.D., Comparative study between intra-anal sponge and needle electrode for electromyographic evaluation of constipated patients, Dis Colon Rectum, 41, pp. 1153-1157, (1998)

[5]

Jorge J.M.N., Wexner S.D., A practical guide to basic anorectal physiology investigations, Contemp Surg, 43, pp. 214-224, (1993)

[6]

Wexner S.D., Marchetti F., Salanga V.D., Corredor C., Jagelman D.G., Neurophysiologic assessment of the anal sphincters, Dis Colon Rectum, 34, pp. 606-612, (1991)

[7]

Johansson C., Nilsson B.Y., Mellgren A., Dolk A., Holmstrom B., Paradoxical sphincter reaction and associated colorectal disorder, Int J Colorectal Dis, 7, pp. 89-94, (1992)

[8]

Johansson C., Ihre T., Holmstrom B., Nordstrom E., Dolk A., Broden G., A combined electromyographic and cineradiologic investigation in patients with defecation disorders, Dis Colon Rectum, 33, pp. 1009-1013, (1990)

[9]

Johansson C., Nilsson B.Y., Mellgren A., Holmstrom B., Dolk A., Is paradoxical sphincter reaction provoked by needle electrode electromyography?, Dis Colon Rectum, 34, pp. 1109-1112, (1991)

[10]

Karlbom U., Eeg-Olofsson K.E., Graf W., Nilsson S., Pahlman L., Paradoxical puborectalis contraction is associated with impaired rectal evacuation, Int J Colorectal Dis, 13, pp. 141-147, (1998)

← 1 2 3 →