ArticleNeurogastroenterology and motility2021
A multicenter study of anorectal pressures and rectal sensation measured with portable manometry in healthy women and men.
Article in Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic value of preoperative anorectal manometry parameters for anastomotic leakage after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026Article
- High-Resolution Anorectal Manometry and Balloon Expulsion Test Outcomes in Functional Constipation: A Comparative Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- Optimizing the Utility of Anorectal Manometry for Diagnosis and Therapy: A Roundtable Review and Recommendations.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2023Review
- Review of the indications, methods, and clinical utility of anorectal manometry and the rectal balloon expulsion test.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Review
- Faecal incontinence in adults.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022Review
- Organizing and Developing a GI Motility Lab in Community Practice: Challenges and Rewards.Current gastroenterology reports · 2022Review
- Diagnostic Strategy and Tools for Identifying Defecatory Disorders.Gastroenterology clinics of North America · 2022Review
- Comparative effectiveness of biofeedback and injectable bulking agents for treatment of fecal incontinence: Design and methods.Contemporary clinical trials · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe equipment and methods for performing anorectal manometry and biofeedback therapy are different and not standardized. Normal values are influenced by age and sex. Our aims were to generate reference values, examine effects of gender and age, and compare anorectal pressures measured with diagnostic and biofeedback catheters and a portable manometry system.
methodsIn this multicenter study, anorectal pressures at rest, during squeeze, and evacuation were measured with diagnostic and biofeedback catheters using Mcompass
resultsThe final dataset comprised 108 (74 women) of 124 participants with normal rectal balloon expulsion time (less than 60 s). During squeeze, anal resting pressure increased by approximately twofold in women and threefold in men. During evacuation, anal pressure exceeded rectal pressure in 87 participants (diagnostic catheter). The specific rectoanal pressures (e.g., resting pressure) were significantly correlated and not different between diagnostic and biofeedback catheters. With the diagnostic catheter, the anal squeeze pressure and rectal pressure during evacuation were greater in men than women (p ≤ 0.02). Among women, women aged 50 years and older had lower anal resting pressure; rectal pressure and the rectoanal gradient during evacuation were greater in older than younger women (p ≤ 0.01).
conclusionsAnal and rectal pressures measured with diagnostic and biofeedback manometry catheters were correlated and not significantly different. Pressures were influenced by age and sex, providing reference values in men and women.
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.