Assessment of pyloric sphincter distensibility and pressure in patients with diabetic gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown that pyloric distensibility is altered in 30-50% of gastroparetic patients but the number of diabetic patients included in prior reports has been small. The aim of the present study was to assess pyloric sphincter measurements in diabetic patients with gastroparesis and to determine whether diabetes characteristics were correlated to pyloric disfunction. METHODS: Pyloric distensibility and pressure were measured using EndoFLIP® system in 46 patients with diabetic gastroparesis (DGP) and compared with 21 healthy volunteers (HV), and 33 patients with idiopathic gastroparesis (IGP). Altered pyloric distensibility was defined as the measurement below 10 mm2 /mmHg at 40 ml of inflation. In diabetic patients, blood glucose, glycated hemoglobin, duration, complications, and treatments were collected. KEY RESULTS: Mean pyloric distensibility at 40 ml of inflation was lower in DGP and IGP groups with, respectively, 10.8 ± 0.9 mm2 /mmHg and 14.8 ± 2.2 mm2 /mmHg in comparison with the HV group (25.2 ± 2.3 mm2 /mmHg; p < 0.005). 56.5% of patients had a decreased pyloric distensibility in the DGP group, 51.5% of patients in the IGP group, and 10% of patients in the HV group. No correlation was found between pyloric sphincter measurements and diabetes characteristics, including blood glucose, glycated hemoglobin, diabetes mellitus type, neuropathy, or GLP1 agonists intake. CONCLUSION AND INTERFERENCES: Pyloric sphincter distensibility and pressure were altered both in diabetic and idiopathic gastroparesis. Pyloric sphincter distensibility was not correlated to diabetes parameters.

Solitary rectal ulcer syndrome in 102 patients: Do different phenotypes make sense?

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the pathophysiological mechanisms of solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS). AIMS: We aim to identify the different phenotypes, taking into account complaints, anatomy and anorectal physiology. METHODS: Complaints, endoscopy results, and physiology data of patients with histologically proven SRUS were collected and analysed. The associated anorectal diseases were faecal incontinence and obstructed defecation. The clinical aspects of SRUS were compared, and factors associated with anorectal diseases were identified. RESULTS: Overall, 102 consecutive patients were included. The predominant lesion was a rectal ulcer (66%), and inflammation of the rectal wall was present in 42% of patients. Abnormal rectal capacities and/or rectal perception was observed in more than half. Nearly half (52%) of the patients met the criteria for obstructed defecation and they tended to more frequently have psychiatric disease (66.7% vs 33.3%; p=0.07). Patients with faecal incontinence (17%) reported more self-perception of anal procidentia (p=0.01) and were more likely to have inflammation of the rectal wall (p=0.02), high-grade internal rectal procidentia (p=0.06) and anal hypotonia (p=0.004); their maximum tolerable volume was lower (p=0.004). CONCLUSION: The characteristics of patients with SRUS suggest different phenotypes. This may be a way to develop a comprehensive treatment strategy.

Management of solitary rectal ulcer syndome: Results of a french national survey: Société Nationale Française de Coloproctologie SNFCP, France.

There is no consensus on the treatment for solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS). This study aimed to obtain information from physicians treating patients with SRUS in a French medical surgical society to facilitate management plans and to develop a support algorithm. Members of the French National Society of Coloproctology (SNFCP) were invited to complete a survey that included twenty items about therapeutic management and healing criteria. Overall, 91 practitioners (median age: 52 [42-59] years) responded to the questionnaire; 64/91 (70.3%) were proctologists, and 27/91 (29.7%) were colorectal surgeons. Only 15 members (16.5%) followed more than 5 patients with SRUS per year. The therapeutic objectives were to improve both patient symptoms (100%) and quality of life (98.9%). Laxative treatment and first-line rehabilitation were agreed upon by 83.5% and 73% of the respondents, respectively. Surgery, mainly rectopexy, was offered after failed medical treatment by 81.1% of the practitioners (79.1%). The first-line strategy preferred by the professionals included laxatives and biofeedback rehabilitation. Surgical treatment, preferably rectopexy, was proposed as a second intervention. No consensus was reached regarding other therapeutic alternatives, and additional studies are required to clarify their indications.

Quality of life in 1870 patients with constipation and/or fecal incontinence: Constipation should not be underestimated.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life is increasingly seen as important, but remains difficult to assess in patients with functional anorectal complaints. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to quantify quality of life and to analyse the symptomatic descriptors associated with a poor outcome in patients with faecal incontinence (FI) and/or constipation. METHODS: The characteristics of the patients, data from self-administered questionnaires and from physical examinations were evaluated prospectively for all cases of functional anorectal disease over a period of thirteen years. Functional anorectal disease included faecal incontinence (FI) and/or constipation. Patients with scores in the lowest quartile of the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) were considered to have suffered severe alterations to their quality of life, and were compared with the other patients. RESULTS: In total, 1870 patients with functional anorectal disease were included (470 with a severely altered quality of life (GIQLI < 70)). Constipation predominated (1212/1870; 65.1%) and severe FI was frequent (761/1870; 40.9%). Severely altered quality of life was significantly associated with constipation (P = 0.0001), urinary urgency and incontinence (P = 0.0001), depression (P = 0.001), diabetes (P = 0.0224), severe FI (P = 0.0001), neurological disease (P = 0.0138) and liquid stools (P = 0.0002) in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Several treatable factors are associated to an impaired quality of life in patients with functional anorectal disorders. Intervention studies are mandatory (stool consistency and frequency).

Deep remission on magnetic resonance imaging impacts outcomes of perianal fistulizing Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND: The long-term management of perianal Crohn's disease for patients on anti-TNF-α therapy remains challenging. AIM: To evaluate the long-term course and complications of patients with perianal fistulas treated with anti-TNF-α based on their clinical remission and healing on MRI. METHODS: Patients were evaluated clinically and by MRI. Deep remission was defined as clinical remission associated with the absence of contrast enhancement and T2 hyperintensity on MRI. Flare-free survival, surgery and hospitalizations were compared based on the presence or not of deep remission. RESULTS: Forty-eight consecutive patients were included with a median follow-up of 62 months after anti-TNF-α first administration. Deep remission was observed in 16 patients (33.4%). For patients in deep remission, the median time to any perianal event was 116 months (95-130) versus 42 months (8-72) in patients with pathological MRI (p < 0.001). Sixteen patients (50%) with pathological MRI had perianal surgery versus 2 (12.5%) in the deep remission group (p < 0.05). The mean duration of cumulative hospital stays was 0.75 ±â€¯0.52 days in the deep remission group versus 19.7 ±â€¯7.4 in the pathological group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Higher flare-free survival and lower rates of surgery and hospitalization were found in patients achieving deep remission.

A systematic literature review on solitary rectal ulcer syndrome: is there a therapeutic consensus in 2018?

PURPOSE: To screen all treatments tested for solitary rectal ulcer syndrome (SRUS) without rectal prolapse and to assess their efficacy. METHOD: A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines, focusing on the treatment of SRUS without rectal prolapse. The types of treatment and their efficacy were collected and critically assessed. RESULTS: A selection of 20 studies among the 470 publications focusing on SRUS provided suitable data for a total of 516 patients. Only 2 studies were randomised prospective trials that focused on argon plasma treatment. The mean follow-up was 21.8 months and ranged from 0.25 to 90 months. Most of the studies focused on surgery, including rectopexy, stapled transanal rectal resection, excision of the ulcer, the Delorme procedure, proctectomy, low anterior resection, and ostomy. Populations of the studies were heterogeneous and selected outcomes were specific (failure of medical or surgical treatment). Conservative treatment (high-fibre diet, laxatives, change of defecatory habits, and biofeedback treatment) induced a symptomatic improvement in 71/91 patients (63.6%) and healing of mucosal lesion in 17/51 patients (33.3%). Surgeries (all types) improved SRUS in 77% (54-100%) of patients. Argon plasma coagulation is a promising technique but longer follow-up is necessary. CONCLUSIONS: The general quality of the studies focusing on the treatment of SRUS was poor due to the heterogeneity of the population, the sample size of the cohorts, and the heterogeneity of efficacy assessments. The therapeutic approach appears to be multimodal and multidisciplinary and validated in centres of expertise. Further studies evaluating multimodal strategies are needed.