Anismus and biofeedback: who benefits?

BACKGROUND: Biofeedback is the main treatment for dyschezia in patients with anismus, but retraining may fail because of the frequent association of pelvirectal disorders with anismus. We set out to identify indices of biofeedback failure in the treatment of anismus. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From May 1990 to May 1993, 27 patients (20 women and seven men; median age 46 years) with anismus in which dyschezia was not improved by laxative agents were enrolled in a biofeedback retraining programme. All patients underwent proctologic examination, anal manometry and defecography. Anismus was defined as an increase in anal pressure during attempted defecation in conjunction with an impairment of rectal emptying as assessed using an objective test (barium paste expulsion). Associated disorders were encountered frequently. These included abnormal perineal descent (22 cases), large rectocoele (12 cases), high-grade rectal prolapse (six cases), abnormally high anal canal pressures at rest (seven cases) and abnormal rectal response to inflation (20 cases). Anismus was the sole abnormality in 12 patients when perineal descent, low-grade prolapse and abnormal rectal sensations were not taken into account. RESULTS: Biofeedback retraining did not suppress dyschezia in 13 out of 27 patients. Neither associated disorders (rectocoele, rectal prolapse, abnormal perineal descent, anal pressure and abnormalities of rectal sensation) nor a relevant past history (hysterectomy, laxative abuse, use of antidepressive agents) were encountered more frequently in these 13 patients than in the other 14. The duration of symptoms before treatment was significantly longer in the group unresponsive to biofeedback retraining (81 +/- 61 compared with 33 +/- 34 months for the responsive group, P < 0.01), but the total duration of symptoms and the number of retraining sessions attended did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: (1) Extensive examination (defecography and manometry) before biofeedback retraining of anismus is not mandatory because the failure of retraining (48%) is not related to the presence of associated pelvirectal disorders. (2) A long past history of dyschezia seems to provide an index of the failure of biofeedback retraining.

Dyschezia and rectocele--a marriage of convenience? Physiologic evaluation of the rectocele in a group of 52 women complaining of difficulty in evacuation.

UNLABELLED: Herniation of the anterior rectal wall into the lumen of the vagina (so called rectocele) may be encountered in patients who complain of constipation and emptying difficulties but it is difficult to ascertain whether this anatomic abnormality is an etiologic factor or a consequence of the dyschezia. PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to assess symptomatic, anatomic, and physiologic features encountered in women with a clearly defined rectocele in order to determine the predisposing factors, symptoms, functional associations, and effects on quantified rectal emptying. METHODS: Clinical, physiologic (manometry), and anatomic (evacuation proctography) assessments were carried out in 26 consecutive women (mean age, 47.6 +/- 12 years) with dyschezia and a large rectocele as evidenced by radiography and compared with a group of 26 consecutive women complaining of dyschezia without a significant rectocele (mean age, 42.6 +/- 14 years). Both groups were similar with respect to mean age, parity, laxative abuse, manual anal evacuation, fecal incontinence, urgency, and weekly stool frequency. RESULTS: Patients having a rectocele differed significantly from those without a rectocele in having frequent endovaginal digitation during defecation (7 vs. 1, P < 0.05), more frequent symptoms of urinary incontinence (14 vs. 3, P < 0.001), and a surgical history of hysterectomy (9 vs. 2, P < 0.05). The rectocele group differed in having a delayed rectal emptying (55.5 +/- 38 vs. 30.3 +/- 23 seconds, P < 0.005), a more frequent incomplete rectal emptying (23 vs. 11, P < 0.0005), and was more often associated with a manometric anismus (16 vs. 6, P < 0.01). During the straining effort, there was a correlation between the depth of the rectocele and the duration of rectal emptying (rs = 0.3, P < 0.05). In the group without manometric anismus, women with a rectocele (n = 10) had a more incomplete rectal emptying than those without rectocele (8/10 vs. 8/19, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Some of our results indicate that the rectocele itself could be a contributory factor in difficult evacuation. These results also exhibit the importance of other disorders, such as anismus, in the occurrence of dyschezia. Physiologic examination therefore should be made before considering surgical repair in any patient with rectocele and dyschezia.