Cargando…
Diagnostic value of the balloon expulsion test compared with anorectal manometry in Indian patients with dyssynergic defecation
INTRODUCTION: Digital rectal examination (DRE) and balloon expulsion test (BET) are simple tests to diagnose dyssynergic defecation (DD). AIM: To determine differences in symptoms and manometry findings in patients with abnormal BET and normal BET. The secondary objective was to ascertain the sensit...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Termedia Publishing House
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7294974/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32550948 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/pg.2020.95558 |
Sumario: | INTRODUCTION: Digital rectal examination (DRE) and balloon expulsion test (BET) are simple tests to diagnose dyssynergic defecation (DD). AIM: To determine differences in symptoms and manometry findings in patients with abnormal BET and normal BET. The secondary objective was to ascertain the sensitivity and specificity of BET and DRE + BET for the diagnosis of DD in an Indian setting using ARM findings as the gold standard. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with chronic constipation referred for anorectal manometry (ARM) between December 2012 and March 2019. DD was diagnosed using ARM. Findings on BET and, in a subset of cases, on DRE + BET were compared with ARM findings. The data were analyzed for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Agreement of BET and DRE + BET with ARM was calculated using Cohen’s κ coefficient. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 1006 cases (734 males, 73%) formed the study cohort. Patients with abnormal BET more frequently reported digitation, bleeding per rectum, and straining (p < 0.00001). Moreover, they had a significantly higher median basal pressure compared to those with normal BET (80 vs. 67, p = 0.03). DD was significantly more common in those with abnormal BET. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of BET in detecting DD were 28.29%, 97.15%, 81.13%, and 75.78%, respectively. The percentage of agreement was 76.34%, and there was fair degree of correlation between the two tests. In a smaller subset of cases (166), DRE and BET findings were both available for analysis. We noted that the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of combined DRE + BET were 57.63%, 88.79%, 73.91%, and 79.17%, respectively. The Cohen’s κ correlation coefficient was 0.49, suggesting moderate agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with abnormal BET more frequently report digitation, straining, and bleeding per rectum, and have higher resting anal pressure. BET is a good screening test for DD in an Indian setting. |
---|