ArticleNeurogastroenterology and motility2022
Do we need an extra dimension? A pilot study on the use of three-dimensional anorectal manometry in children with functional constipation.
Article in Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Towards a definition of refractory/therapy-resistant/intractable constipation in children: a cross-sectional, questionnaire-based, online survey.BMJ paediatrics open · 2024Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecently, a new high-definition (or three-dimensional "3D") high-resolution anorectal manometry (3D-ARM) catheter has been introduced. This catheter allows for a more detailed visualization of the anal canal. However, its clinical utility and tolerability in children with constipation are unknown. Our primary objective was to evaluate the agreement between findings from solid-state high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) and 3D-ARM. Secondary objectives were to investigate if 3D-ARM has additional value over HR-ARM and to evaluate patient and provider experience.
methodsProspective pilot study including children (8-18 years of age) with functional constipation scheduled for anorectal manometry. Children underwent HR-ARM and 3D-ARM consecutively. We compared manometry results of both procedures and collected data on patient and provider experience via self-developed questionnaires. KEY
resultsData of ten patients were analyzed (60% female, median age 14.9 years). In the majority of patients, ARMs were performed awake (n = 8, 80%). In two patients, the recto-anal inhibitory reflex (RAIR) was visualized during HR-ARM but not during 3D-ARM. Anal canal resting pressures were significantly higher during 3D-ARM compared to HR-ARM (median 77 mmHg [IQR 59-94] vs. 69 mmHg [IQR 51-91], respectively, p = 0.037). No significant anatomical or muscular abnormalities were visualized during the 3D-ARM. The majority of children identified the 3D-ARM as the more unpleasant (5/7 [71%]) and more painful procedure (6/7 [86%]) and therefore preferred the HR-ARM (4/7 [57%]). CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: In our patient sample, 3D-ARM was associated with more discomfort without providing more useful information and even resulted in an inconsistent visualization of the RAIR.
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.