Neshatian Leila
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2018 Jan;34(1):31-37. doi: 10.1097/MOG.0000000000000407.
To summarize the advances in diagnostic modalities and management options for defecatory dysfunction and highlight the areas in need of further research.
The diagnostic utility of high-resolution anorectal manometry (ARM), which has emerged as a promising tool for the diagnosis of defecatory dysfunction, appears to be questionable in differentiating disease from normal physiology. There also seems to be discrepancy between results of various tests of anorectal function in the diagnosis of defecatory dysfunction. New revisions in diagnostic criteria for defecatory dysfunction by Rome IV consortium, may enhance its diagnostic yield. Biofeedback remains to be the most effective evidence-based treatment option for patients with defecatory dysfunction. Anorectal pressure profile cannot predict or mediate the success of biofeedback. Biofeedback may improve the symptoms through central effects.
Despite the advances in the ARM and defecography techniques, no one test has been able to be considered as the 'gold standard' for diagnosis of defecatory dysfunction. The mechanism of action of biofeedback in defecatory dysfunction remains poorly understood.
总结排便功能障碍诊断方法及治疗选择的进展,并强调需要进一步研究的领域。
高分辨率肛肠测压法(ARM)作为一种有前景的排便功能障碍诊断工具,其在区分疾病与正常生理状态方面的诊断效用似乎存疑。在排便功能障碍的诊断中,各种肛肠功能测试结果之间似乎也存在差异。罗马IV联盟对排便功能障碍诊断标准的新修订,可能会提高其诊断率。生物反馈仍然是排便功能障碍患者最有效的循证治疗选择。肛肠压力曲线无法预测或介导生物反馈的成功。生物反馈可能通过中枢效应改善症状。
尽管ARM和排粪造影技术取得了进展,但尚无一种测试能被视为排便功能障碍诊断的“金标准”。生物反馈在排便功能障碍中的作用机制仍知之甚少。