ArticleJournal of neurogastroenterology and motility2025
Validation of the London Classification for Rectal Hyposensitivity in an Anorectal Manometry Database of 2540 Patients With Functional Defecatory Disorder.
Article in Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in High-resolution Anorectal Manometry: Current Applications and Future Directions.Current gastroenterology reports · 2026Review
- Real‑world Application of the International Anorectal Physiology Working Group Standardized Protocol and London Classification: A Multi‑country Cross‑sectional Survey of Anorectal Manometry Practice in Asia.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Article
- Clinical relevance of transperineal ultrasound compared with anorectal manometry for the evaluation of female patients with obstructive defecation syndrome.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Rectal hyposensitivity (RH), as defined by the London Classification, has been linked to sensory dysfunction caused by diabetes mellitus and Parkinson's disease (PD); however, its clinical interpretation has not been sufficiently validated. In this study, we aim to explore the correlations between rectal sensory thresholds and the clinical characteristics of patients with functional defecatory disorders. Methods: We reviewed data from patients who underwent high-resolution anorectal manometry and acquired their clinical characteristics using a standardized questionnaire. The associations between RH based on either 1 (borderline RH) or 2 (RH) abnormal rectal sensory thresholds and patients' clinical and demographic characteristics were analyzed using linear and logistic regression models in the overall sex-stratified populations. Results: We enrolled 2540 patients, of whom 1046 (41.2%) were men. Overall, 150 (5.9%) patients were diagnosed with RH, whereas 422 (16.6%) had borderline RH. Multivariate linear regression analysis revealed that the Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score (CCCS) increased linearly with the increase in the number of abnormal rectal sensory thresholds (effect per threshold: 0.900 [standard deviation: 0.188]). Upon stratification by sex, borderline RH was positively associated with diabetes mellitus, PD, and CCCS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.11, 95% confidence interval [1.08, 4.15]; aOR = 1.49 [1.03, 2.14]; aOR = 1.03 [1.01, 1.05], respectively) in women. However, RH was positively associated with only the CCCS. Conclusions: Defining RH based on 1 or more abnormal sensory thresholds showed better clinical correlation with patient characteristics. However, further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings before proposing revisions to the current London classification criteria.
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.