ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2025
Spastic pelvic floor syndrome and puborectalis syndrome: the different stages of the same disease.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dyssynergia phenotypes in obstructed defecation: insights from Fecobionics assessment.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2026Observational
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe diagnosis and treatment of puborectalis syndrome (PRS) and spastic pelvic floor syndrome (SPFS) are still up for debate. This study aims to investigate and examine the similarities and differences between PRS and SPFS.
methodsThis study recruited 13 PRS cases, 10 SPFS cases, and 16 controls. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), histology, and ultrastructural pathology were explored. Additionally, anorectal manometry was performed prior to surgery, and Wexner constipation scores and patient assessment of constipation quality of life (PAC-QOL) scores monitored before surgery and 6 and 12 months post-surgery.
resultsThe puborectalis thickness in the pelvic MRIs of the SPFS and control groups did not appear to differ (4.62 ± 0.38 vs 4.56 ± 0.47, p = 0.378); however, the puborectalis in the PRS group was substantially thicker than that of the SPFS (8.65 ± 1.17 vs 4.62 ± 0.38, p < 0.001). The SPFS group showing atrophy and degeneration of muscle fibers and the PRS group exhibiting necrosis of muscle fibers, both groups had distorted texture myofibrils, disorganized arrangement, and rough Z lines; however, in severe cases of PRS group, localized myofibrils fracture and myofilament dissolution presenting as vacuolation. Patients with normal preoperative rectal propulsion force had improvements in postoperative Wexner constipation scores and PAC-QOL scores.
conclusionHistological and ultrastructural pathological evidence suggests that SPFS and PRS are distinct phases of paradoxical puborectalis syndrome (PPS). Furthermore, one indication for PPS surgical treatment is normal rectal evacuation pressure.
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.