2004Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and NutritionRequires access

P0988 RECTAL FUNCTION IN FUNCTIONAL NON-RETENTIVE FECAL SOILING (FNRFS)

Wieger Voskuijl, M. A. Benninga, Rijk van Ginkel, Guus Hart, J. A. J. M. Taminiau, Guy E. Boeckxstaens

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Introduction: To date children with FNRFS are believed to suffer from a mental disturbance. To what extent abnormalities in rectal function may be involved, has not been evaluated. We evaluated rectal sensation and compliance in these patients using the barostat. Methods: Rectal sensation (first sensation, urge to defecate and pain), and compliance were determined using a barostat (pressure controlled, intermittent distension procedure). Results: Rectal function was evaluated in 19 children with FNRFS (15 M, mean age 10.0 ± 1.9 yrs) and compared with 22 healthy volunteers (11 M, mean age 12.7 ± 2.6 yrs) (HV). Mean sensation thresholds (first sensation, urge to defecate and pain) were not significantly different from HV. Moreover, mean rectal compliance in FNRFS (14 ± 4.0 ml/mmHg) was not significantly different from HV (16 ± 2 ml/mmHg). A subgroup (4/19) of FNRFS patients showed an abnormal rectal function: 2 patients (11%) showed disturbed rectal sensation for urge (cutoff: mean of HV + 2SD). Additionally, another 2 patients (11%) had an abnormal rectal compliance (cutoff: mean of HV + 2SD). Conclusion: Rectal function is normal in the majority of patients with FNRFS underscoring that fecal retention does not play a role in the symptomatology in this patient group. However, in a subgroup, increased compliance (11%) or decreased sensation (11%) can be demonstrated suggesting impaired rectal function as possible underlying pathophysiological mechanism.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Introduction: To date children with FNRFS are believed to suffer from a mental disturbance. To what extent abnormalities in rectal function may be involved, has not been evaluated. We evaluated rectal sensation and compliance in these patients using the barostat. Methods: Rectal sensation (first sensation, urge to defecate and pain), and compliance were determined using a barostat (pressure controlled, intermittent distension procedure). Results: Rectal function was evaluated in 19 children with FNRFS (15 M, mean age 10.0 ± 1.9 yrs) and compared with 22 healthy volunteers (11 M, mean age 12.7 ± 2.6 yrs) (HV). Mean sensation thresholds (first sensation, urge to defecate and pain) were not significantly different from HV. Moreover, mean rectal compliance in FNRFS (14 ± 4.0 ml/mmHg) was not significantly different from HV (16 ± 2 ml/mmHg). A subgroup (4/19) of FNRFS patients showed an abnormal rectal function: 2 patients (11%) showed disturbed rectal sensation for urge (cutoff: mean of HV + 2SD). Additionally, another 2 patients (11%) had an abnormal rectal compliance (cutoff: mean of HV + 2SD). Conclusion: Rectal function is normal in the majority of patients with FNRFS underscoring that fecal retention does not play a role in the symptomatology in this patient group. However, in a subgroup, increased compliance (11%) or decreased sensation (11%) can be demonstrated suggesting impaired rectal function as possible underlying pathophysiological mechanism.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Introduction: To date children with FNRFS are believed to suffer from a mental disturbance. To what extent abnormalities in rectal function may be involved, has not been evaluated. We evaluated rectal sensation and compliance in these patients using the barostat. Methods: Rectal sensation (first sensation, urge to defecate and pain), and compliance were determined using a barostat (pressure controlled, intermittent distension procedure). Results: Rectal function was evaluated in 19 children with FNRFS (15 M, mean age 10.0 ± 1.9 yrs) and compared with 22 healthy volunteers (11 M, mean age 12.7 ± 2.6 yrs) (HV). Mean sensation thresholds (first sensation, urge to defecate and pain) were not significantly different from HV. Moreover, mean rectal compliance in FNRFS (14 ± 4.0 ml/mmHg) was not significantly different from HV (16 ± 2 ml/mmHg). A subgroup (4/19) of FNRFS patients showed an abnormal rectal function: 2 patients (11%) showed disturbed rectal sensation for urge (cutoff: mean of HV + 2SD). Additionally, another 2 patients (11%) had an abnormal rectal compliance (cutoff: mean of HV + 2SD). Conclusion: Rectal function is normal in the majority of patients with FNRFS underscoring that fecal retention does not play a role in the symptomatology in this patient group. However, in a subgroup, increased compliance (11%) or decreased sensation (11%) can be demonstrated suggesting impaired rectal function as possible underlying pathophysiological mechanism.

Key concepts: Medicine, Feces, Fecal incontinence, Gastroenterology, Ecology, Biology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
P0988 RECTAL FUNCTION IN FUNCTIONAL NON-RETENTIVE FECAL SOILING (FNRFS) — Research Paper | ScholarLens