SynthesisNeurogastroenterology and motility2021
Anorectal manometry to diagnose dyssynergic defecation: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy.
Synthesis 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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a Simple, Point-of-Care Device to Test Anorectal Function in Patients with Constipation: Randomized Clinical Trial.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2023Trial
- Management of constipation: A narrative review of evolving strategies and methodological challenges.World journal of methodology · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Anorectal Manometry in Identifying Dyssynergic Defecation among Chronic Constipation Patients.Annals of African medicine · 2026Observational
- Beyond stapled transanal rectal resectionWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2026Review
- 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
- Colorectal motility patterns and psychiatric traits in functional constipation and constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: A study from China.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Article
- 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
- 2022 Seoul Consensus on Clinical Practice Guidelines for Functional Constipation.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2023Review
- Are There Sex Differences in Defecation Patterns in Patients with Defecation Disorders? - A Single-center Observational Study.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2023Article
- Comparison of Anorectal Manometry, Rectal Balloon Expulsion Test, and Defecography for Diagnosing Defecatory Disorders.Gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Do we need an extra dimension? A pilot study on the use of three-dimensional anorectal manometry in children with functional constipation.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Article
- Functional Constipation and Dyssynergic Defecation in Children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChronic constipation is a common condition, and dyssynergic defecation underlies up to 40% of cases. Anorectal manometry is recommended to assess for dyssynergic defecation among chronically constipated patients but remains poorly standardized. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of anorectal manometry and determine optimal testing parameters.
methodsWe performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy including cohort studies of chronically constipated patients and case-control studies of patients with dyssynergic defecation or healthy controls. Meta-analysis was performed to determine summary sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). KEY
resultsA total of 15 studies comprising 2140 patients were included. Including all studies (estimating optimal diagnostic accuracy), the AUC was 0.78 [95% CI 0.72-0.82], summary sensitivity was 79% [61%-90%], and summary specificity was 64% [44%-79%] to diagnose dyssynergic defecation. In cohort studies only (estimating real-world diagnostic accuracy), the AUC was 0.72 [0.66-0.77], summary sensitivity was 86% [64%-95%], and summary specificity was 49% [30%-68%]. Employing three consecutive simulated defecation attempts improved sensitivity to 94%. A fourth simulated defecation maneuver with air insufflation may improve accuracy. Measuring anorectal pressures to identify complex dyssynergic patterns did not improve real-world diagnostic accuracy estimates over anal pressure measurement alone. Choice of manometry system did not impact diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Following the current iteration of the London consensus protocol (three simulated defecation attempts measuring anal relaxation), the role of anorectal manometry in evaluating dyssynergic defecation appears limited. Future iterations of this protocol may improve diagnostic accuracy.
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.