Endoflip vs high-definition manometry in the assessment of fecal incontinence: A data-driven unsupervised comparison.

backgroundHow much anal sphincter dysfunction contributes to fecal incontinence (FI) is not clear. High-definition anorectal manometry (HDAM) and functional luminal imaging probe (Endoflip) are two new techniques to study anal sphincter function.

aimsThe goal was to compare the diagnostic utility of HDAM and Endoflip using optimal feature(s) in each modality for FI diagnosis.

methodsBlinded classification was carried out on 70 female subjects (32 FI & 38 controls), using 3 prominent machine-learning clustering techniques, with 3 distance metrics. For HDAM, descriptive statistics, shape, and textural features characterizing the spatial relationship of pixels in the HDAM high-pressure zone, and for Endoflip, permutations of pressure and CSA combinations (ie, multiplication, division, or individually) at rest and squeeze were tested.

resultsIntramodality: (a) Endoflip: Best clustering was obtained using the combination of the ratio of CSA over pressure at 40 and 50 mL at rest, which had significantly better specificity (P < 0.001) than using only pressure at 50 mL, no difference in sensitivity (P = 0.68). (b) HDAM: clustering using textural information at rest had significantly higher specificity compared to using only the maximal pressure at rest (P < 0.001). Intermodality: Clustering results using optimal features were not significantly different with respect to sensitivity or specificity (P > 0.05). Optimal Endoflip feature set differed significantly in specificity compared to HDAM maximal pressure at both rest (P < 0.001) and squeeze (P < 0.001).

conclusionDefective anal closure function is fairly sensitive and highly specific in diagnosing FI. Using optimal feature sets, HDAM and Endoflip perform in a similar fashion in diagnosing FI, but are not complementary.