Efficacy of combination of biofeedback therapy and pelvic floor muscle training in dyssynergic defecation.

BACKGROUND: It is now known that with appropriate exercises, the functions of the muscles in the body ameliorate and increase in strength. We applied pelvic floor muscle relaxation training and exercises that strengthen the abdominal and pelvic muscles in combination with biofeedback therapy (BFT) to patients with dyssynergic defecation (DD). METHODS: Patients who met the criteria for DD and had no underlying organic cause were included in this study. The electromyography (EMG) technique was used for BFT therapy. Patients had received at least six sessions of BFT. BFT was considered successful in patients when the DD pattern in anorectal manometry (ARM) disappeared and/or adequate anal relaxation was obtained following BFT and in patients who had full clinical recovery. RESULTS: Data of 104 patients (58 females [55.8%] and 46 males [44.2%]) was evaluated. Abdominal and rectal symptoms disappeared in 71 (68.26%) patients. Of the patients who achieved symptomatic improvement, 58 (55.76%) saw a disappearance of the dyssynergic defecation pattern. When the differences between anal sphincter pressures before and after treatment were compared in patients who responded to BFT and those who did not, no significant differences were observed, but significant changes were found in anal squeezing pressures. It was found that those who had high squeezing pressures before BFT, those who increased their squeezing pressures after BFT, and those who decreased their resting pressure responded better to BFT. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, BFT was found to be more effective in those with a high squeezing pressure and those that increased squeezing pressure after BFT. These findings will influence the treatment of patients with dyssynergic defecation who do not respond to treatment. A combination of abdominal and pelvic floor muscle exercises and BFT increases patient response.

Prevalence of advanced histologic features in diminutive colon polyps.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Accurate in vivo differentiation of colon polyp histology may serve to prevent the resection of diminutive hyperplastic polyps in the distal colon or the need for histologic assesment of diminutive polyps after resection. The clinical implementation of these strategies depends on the prevalence of advanced histologic findings among diminutive polyps. We aimed to determine the prevalence of advanced histologic features (villous features, high-grade dysplasia, and adenocarcinoma) in diminutive colon polyps and compare it to small and larger polyps. PATIENTS/METHODS: The data of patients who had undergone elective colonoscopy at a tertiary-care referral center were retrospectively reviewed. The size, morphology, and location of all polyps were recorded. Polyps were divided into 3 groups according to their size: diminutive (≤ 5 mm), small (6-9 mm), and large (≥ 10 mm). RESULTS: A total of 7160 polyps in 3226 eligible patients were evaluated. The mean diameter of the polyps were 6.7 ± 4.9 mm. Histopathologic diagnosis were adenomatous in 4548 (63.5%) and non-adenomatous in 2612 (36.5%). Out of 7160 polyps, 4902 (68.5%) were diminutive (1-5 mm), 1360 (19%) were small (6-9 mm), and 898 (12.5%) large (≥ 10 mm) polyps. Among the diminutive polyps 2739 (55.9%) had adenomatous histology. There were 66 polyps (1.3%) with advanced histology in the diminutive group, 72 (5.2%) in the small group, 263 (29.2%) in the large polyp group. Diminutive polyps had a lower frequency of advanced histology compared to small and large polyps (p = 0.001). When the histology of the polyps were evaluated based on the size of the largest polyp the patient has, 2202 patients had polyp(s) ≤ 5 mm. The frequency of advanced histology was 2.2% in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of advanced histology in diminutive polyps is quite low (1.3%) which supports the clinical implementation of discard, resect and discard strategies in diminutive polyps.

Is endorectal ultrasound still useful for staging rectal cancer?

OBJECTIVE: Staging in rectal carcinoma is important for planning treatment. Preoperative staging and treatment strategies have changed along with improvements in imaging techniques. The aim of this work is to evaluate the accuracy of endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) in rectal cancers, especially in low rectal cancers and stenotic cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2011 to December 2011, patients diagnosed with rectal cancer who were admitted to our endosonography unit for staging and who were operated on in our hospital were evaluated retrospectively. Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded. Endosonographic staging was compared to postoperative pathological staging. RESULTS: In total, 38 patients (28 males, 10 females) were included. Their mean age was 57.6±11.3 years (27-75 years). Thirteen (34.2%) had stenotic lesions. The accuracy of ERUS for staging of lesions was evaluated according to pathology and was 73.7% overall (kappa coefficient = 0.317; p = 0.002). When patients were split into stenotic and non stenotic groups, the accuracy was 68% (kappa coefficient = 0.170; p = 0.125) for stenotic lesions and 84.6% (kappa coefficient = 0.606; p = 0.001) for non-stenotic lesions. Internal and external sphincter involvement were significantly correlated with the postoperative pathological evaluation in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Technological improvements in imaging methods have made the diagnosis and management of malignancies more precise. Low rectal tumours, have difficult characteristics for evaluation because of their unique location. Although ERUS has some disadvantages, it is still useful for T staging, evaluating sphincter involvement, and defining tumour size and distance from the anal verge. ERUS was less accurate for T staging of stenotic tumours, but the accuracy may still be within acceptable limits.