2010Revista Española de Enfermedades DigestivasOpen access

Usefulness of manometry to select patients with anal fissure for controlled anal dilatation

Cecílio Santander, Javier P. Gisbert, Ricardo Moreno‐Otero, Adrián G. McNicholl, José Luís Mate

Open full text 16 citations

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the use of anorectal manometry to select patients for controlled anal dilatation. METHODOLOGY: A prospective study was performed using anorectal manometry on all patients with chronic anal fissure who did not have a good response to conservative treatment. Those with increased anal resting pressure were treated with controlled anal dilatation using a two valved anuscope. A second anorectal manometry was indicated after controlled anal dilatation. RESULTS: 19 patients without anorectal pathology (Healthy Control Group) and 57 patients with chronic anal fissure were included in this study. Controlled anal dilatation was performed on 27 patients, maximum resting pressure 122 ± 19 mmHg. In the controlled anal dilatation group the healing rate was 92.5%, mean maximum resting pressure post-controlled anal dilatation was 91 ± 30 mmHg. We found one case of transitory anal incontinence (3.7%). None of the patients had anal incontinence at 18 months of the follow-up. In the remaining 30 patients non selected for controlled anal dilatation (chronic anal fissure control group), a proportion of 53.3% recurrences were registered after conservative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Anal healing of chronic anal fissure and a significant decrease in maximum resting pressure recorded by manometry confirms the success of this procedure. The manometric evaluation of the maximum resting pressure is useful in the selection of chronic anal fissure patients for controlled anal dilatation. The efficacy of dilatation to treat chronic anal fissure in patients with raised anal sphincter pressure was high and complications were rare.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

AIM: To evaluate the use of anorectal manometry to select patients for controlled anal dilatation. METHODOLOGY: A prospective study was performed using anorectal manometry on all patients with chronic anal fissure who did not have a good response to conservative treatment. Those with increased anal resting pressure were treated with controlled anal dilatation using a two valved anuscope. A second anorectal manometry was indicated after controlled anal dilatation. RESULTS: 19 patients without anorectal pathology (Healthy Control Group) and 57 patients with chronic anal fissure were included in this study. Controlled anal dilatation was performed on 27 patients, maximum resting pressure 122 ± 19 mmHg. In the controlled anal dilatation group the healing rate was 92.5%, mean maximum resting pressure post-controlled anal dilatation was 91 ± 30 mmHg. We found one case of transitory anal incontinence (3.7%). None of the patients had anal incontinence at 18 months of the follow-up. In the remaining 30 patients non selected for controlled anal dilatation (chronic anal fissure control group), a proportion of 53.3% recurrences were registered after conservative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Anal healing of chronic anal fissure and a significant decrease in maximum resting pressure recorded by manometry confirms the success of this procedure. The manometric evaluation of the maximum resting pressure is useful in the selection of chronic anal fissure patients for controlled anal dilatation. The efficacy of dilatation to treat chronic anal fissure in patients with raised anal sphincter pressure was high and complications were rare.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 16 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

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

AIM: To evaluate the use of anorectal manometry to select patients for controlled anal dilatation. METHODOLOGY: A prospective study was performed using anorectal manometry on all patients with chronic anal fissure who did not have a good response to conservative treatment. Those with increased anal resting pressure were treated with controlled anal dilatation using a two valved anuscope. A second anorectal manometry was indicated after controlled anal dilatation. RESULTS: 19 patients without anorectal pathology (Healthy Control Group) and 57 patients with chronic anal fissure were included in this study. Controlled anal dilatation was performed on 27 patients, maximum resting pressure 122 ± 19 mmHg. In the controlled anal dilatation group the healing rate was 92.5%, mean maximum resting pressure post-controlled anal dilatation was 91 ± 30 mmHg. We found one case of transitory anal incontinence (3.7%). None of the patients had anal incontinence at 18 months of the follow-up. In the remaining 30 patients non selected for controlled anal dilatation (chronic anal fissure control group), a proportion of 53.3% recurrences were registered after conservative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Anal healing of chronic anal fissure and a significant decrease in maximum resting pressure recorded by manometry confirms the success of this procedure. The manometric evaluation of the maximum resting pressure is useful in the selection of chronic anal fissure patients for controlled anal dilatation. The efficacy of dilatation to treat chronic anal fissure in patients with raised anal sphincter pressure was high and complications were rare.

Key concepts: Medicine, Anal fissure, Anorectal manometry, Anal sphincter, Surgery, Internal anal sphincter, Anal canal, Defecation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Usefulness of manometry to select patients with anal fissure for controlled anal dilatation — Research Paper | ScholarLens