ArticleWorld journal of surgery2007
Assessment of anal sphincter function by Sengstaken-Blakemore tube anal manometry.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnal manometry is a useful tool for testing the effectiveness of surgical treatment. However, most techniques for anal pressure measurement are not easily available because of high cost. The aim of the present study was to introduce an easy and reproducible method for measuring anal pressures in testing the effectiveness of surgical procedures. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe used a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube connected to a mercury manometer. After calibration of the system by inflating the distal (gastric) balloon and filling connection lines to the mercury manometer with 0.9% NaCl solution, resting and squeezing anal pressures were measured. The system was used on 50 human subjects (35 with anal fissure and 15 normal volunteers). Left lateral internal sphincterotomy had been performed in the anal fissure cases. Anal pressures were measured preoperatively and on postoperative days (POD) 2 and 20.
resultsPreoperative resting anal pressures in the group with anal fissure (83.4 +/- 1 mmHg) were significantly higher than those in the group of normal individuals (52 +/- 1.2 mmHg; p = 0.001). Resting anal pressures after the sphincterotomy (29 +/- 1 mmHg) were found to be significantly lower on POD 2, and resting anal pressure measurements (47 +/- 1 mmHg) on POD 20 were lower than the corresponding preoperative values. These values are closer to those of normal volunteers (p = 0.016).
conclusionsAnal manometry can be performed with this easily constructible and inexpensive system. This reproducible method can be used in the assessment of the results of surgical treatment in patients with anal and perianal diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.