Observational studyColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2020
Comparison between high-resolution water-perfused anorectal manometry and THD
Observational study in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Precision minimally invasive strategy for Hirschsprung's disease: from anatomical resection to whole-cycle functional management-a review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Article
- Review of the indications, methods, and clinical utility of anorectal manometry and the rectal balloon expulsion test.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Review
- Effect of a subsequent pregnancy on anal sphincter integrity and function after obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI).International urogynecology journal · 2021Observational
- Early secondary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs): experience and a review of the literature.International urogynecology journal · 2021Review
- Outcome of anal symptoms and anorectal function following two obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS)-a nested case-controlled study.International urogynecology journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimAnorectal physiology tests provide a functional assessment of the anal canal. The aim of this study was to compare the results generated by standard high-resolution water-perfused manometry (WPM) with the newer THD
methodThis was a prospective observational study. Conventional manometry was carried out using a water-perfused catheter with high-resolution manometry and compared with the Anopress system with air-filled catheters. All patients underwent the two procedures successively in a randomized order. Time to arrive at the resting pressure plateau, resting, squeeze, straining pressure and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain were recorded. A qualitative analysis of the two devices was performed.
resultsBetween 2016 and 2017, 60 patients were recruited. The time from insertion of the catheter to arriving at the resting pressure plateau was significantly lower with the Anopress compared with WPM: 12 s [interquartile range (IQR) 10-17 s] versus 100 s (IQR 67-121 s) (P < 0.001). A strong correlation between the manometric values of WPM and the Anopress was observed. Both procedures were well tolerated, although the VAS score for insertion of the WPM catheter was significantly higher. The Anopress was easier to use and more time-efficient than the WPM.
conclusionThe pressure values obtained with Anopress correlated well with those of conventional manometry. The Anopress has the advantage of being less time-consuming, user-friendly and better tolerated by patients.
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.