ArticleNeurogastroenterology and motility2022
Optimizing techniques for measuring anal resting and squeeze pressures with high-resolution manometry.
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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Trial: Effectiveness and Safety of a Novel Anal Insert Device for Treatment of Faecal Incontinence.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2026Trial
- A randomized double-blind trial of clonidine and colesevelam for women with fecal incontinence.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2024Trial
- Thickening of the internal anal sphincter: correlation with external rectal intussusception and associated features at MR proctography and anal manometry.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic-Therapeutic Care Pathway in Chronic Constipation: AIGO (Italian Association of Gastroenterologists and Gastrointestinal Endoscopists) Position Paper.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Inadequate Propulsion and Pelvic Floor Relaxation in Dyssynergic Defecation: Insights From Synchronous Proctomanometry.Gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Defecatory disorders are a common cause of chronic constipation in Parkinson disease.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 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
- Reproducibility of high-resolution manometry among healthy and constipated persons.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Article
- Comparison of Anorectal Manometry, Rectal Balloon Expulsion Test, and Defecography for Diagnosing Defecatory Disorders.Gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Automated extraction of anorectal pressures from high-resolution manometry reports.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2022Article
- Review of the indications, methods, and clinical utility of anorectal manometry and the rectal balloon expulsion test.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal methods for measuring and analyzing anal resting and squeeze pressure with high-resolution manometry (HRM) are unclear.
methodsAnal resting and squeeze pressures were measured with HRM in 90 healthy women, 35 women with defecatory disorders (DD), and 85 with fecal incontinence (FI). Pressures were analyzed with Manoview™ software and a customized approach. Resting pressures measured for 20, 60, and 300 s were compared. During the squeeze period, (3 maneuvers, 20 s each), the squeeze increment, which was averaged over 5, 10, 15, and 20 s, and squeeze duration were evaluated.
resultsCompared to healthy women, the anal resting pressure, squeeze pressure increment, and squeeze duration were lower in FI (p ≤ 0.04) but not in DD. The 20, 60, and 300 s resting pressures were strongly correlated (concordance correlation coefficients = 0.96-0.99) in healthy and DD women. The 5 s squeeze increment was the greatest; 10, 15, and 20 s values were progressively lower (p < 0.001). The squeeze pressure increment and duration differed (p < 0.01) among the three maneuvers in healthy and DD women but not in FI women. The upper 95th percentile limit for squeeze duration was 19.5 s in controls, 19.9 s in DD, and 19.3 s in FI. Adjusted for age, resting pressure, and squeeze duration, a greater squeeze increment was associated with a lower risk of FI versus health (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.97).
conclusionsThese findings suggest that anal resting and squeeze pressures can be accurately measured over 20 s. In most patients, one squeeze maneuver is probably sufficient.
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.