Abstract
Objectives
The purpose of this study is to evaluate normal values and pressure morphology of three-dimensional high-resolution anorectal manometry (3D-HRM) in asymptomatic volunteers and to determine the relationship between objective measurable values, gender, and age.
Patients and methods
Anorectal pressures and rectal sensation were evaluated in 110 asymptomatic volunteers (46 females and 64 males) ranging in age from 18 to 80 years (median age, 52 years) in left lateral position by three-dimensional high-resolution manometry.
Results
Maximum squeeze pressure, residual anal pressure, and intrarectal pressure were significantly higher in males compared to females (p < 0.05 each). Duration of sustained squeeze was significantly lower in males compared to females (p < 0.05). Maximum resting pressure, mean resting pressure, and maximum squeeze pressure were inversely correlated (r = −0.310, p < 0.01, r = −0.276, p < 0.01, and r = −0.198, p < 0.05) with age. The value of rectoanal pressure differential was −13.1 ± 5.8 mmHg which was negative during defecation. Overall variation coefficient in anorectal pressures ranged between 0.21 and 0.34.
Conclusion
This study establishes normal values for anorectal pressure by 3D-HRM in asymptomatic volunteers. There are significant gender differences concerning squeeze patterns. Increasing age is associated with lower maximum resting pressure, mean resting pressure, and maximum squeeze pressure. Normal characteristic pressure morphology of anorectum can be obtained at rest, during squeeze, and bear down as in defecation by 3D-HRM.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference
Schuster MM, Coller JA, Barrett RC (1965) Simultaneous manometric recording of internal and external anal sphincter reflexes. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp 116:79–88
Arndorfer RC, Stef JJ, Dodds WJ (1977) Improved infusion system for intraluminal esophageal manometry. Gastroenterology 73(1):23–27
Kwiatek MA, Pandolfino JE, Kahrilas PJ (2011) 3D-high resolution manometry of the esophagogastric junction. Neurogastroenterol Motil 23(11):461–469
Jones MP, Post J, Crowell MD (2007) High-resolution manometry in the evaluation of anorectal disorders: a simultaneous comparison with water-perfused manometry. Am J Gastroenterol 102:850–855
Diamant NE, Kamm MA, Wald A et al (1999) AGA technical review on anorectal testing techniques. Gastroenterology 116(3):735–760
Rao SS (2010) Advances in diagnostic assessment of fecal incontinence and dyssynergic defecation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 8(11):910–919
Corsetti M (2010) Anorectal manometry with water-perfused catheter in healthy adults with no functional bowel disorders. Colorectal Dis 12(3):220–225
Gundling F, Seidl H, Scalercio N et al (2010) Influence of gender and age on anorectal function: normal values from anorectal manometry in a large Caucasian population. Digestion 81(4):207–213
Florisson JM, Coolen JC, Bissett IP et al (2006) A novel model used to compare water-perfused and solid-state anorectal manometry. Tech Coloproctol 10(1):17–20
Sun WM, Read NW (1989) Anorectal function in normal human subjects: effect of gender. Int J Colorectal Dis 4(3):188–196
Kritasampan P, Lohsiriwat S, Leelakusolvong S (2004) Manometric tests of anorectal function in healthy adult Thai subjects. J Med Assoc Thai 87(5):536–542
Simpson RR, Kennedy ML, Nguyen MH et al (2006) Anal manometry: a comparison of techniques. Dis Colon Rectum 49(7):1033–1038
Diamant NE, Kamm MA, Wald A et al (1999) American gastroenterological association medical position statement on anorectal testing techniques. Gastroenterology 116:732–760
Rao SS, Azpiroz F, Diamant N et al (2002) Minimum standards of anorectal manometry. Neurogastroenterol Motil 14:553–559
Parks TG (1992) The usefulness of tests in anorectal disease. World J Surg 16(5):804–810
Ciriza-de-Los-Rios C, Ruiz-de-Leon-San-Juan A, Diaz-Rubio Garcia M et al (2010) Differences in the pressures of canal anal and rectal sensitivity in patients with fecal incontinence, chronic constipation and healthy subjects. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 102(12):683–690
Jameson JS, Chia YW, Kamm MA et al (1994) Effect of age, sex and parity on anorectal function. Br J Surg 81(11):1689–1692
Fox JC, Fletcher JG, Zinsmeister AR et al (2006) Effect of aging on anorectal and pelvic floor functions in females. Dis Colon Rectum 49(11):1726–1735
Felt-Bersma RJ, Gort G, Meuwissen SG (1991) Normal values in anal manometry and rectal sensation: a problem of range. Hepatogastroenterology 38(5):444–449
Bannister JJ, Abouzekry L, Read NW (1987) Effect of aging on anorectal function. Gut 28:353–357
Rao SS, Hatfield R, Soffer E (1999) Manometric tests of anorectal function in healthy adults. Am J Gastroenterol 94:773–783
Schroeder HD, Reske-Nielsen E (1983) Fiber types in the striated urethral and anal sphincters. Acta Neuropathol 60:278–281
McHugh SM, Diamant NE (1987) Anal canal pressure profile: a reappraisal as determined by rapid pullthrough technique. Gut 28:1234–1241
Rao SS, Welcher KD, Leistikow JS (1998) Obstructive defecation: a failure of rectoanal coordination. Am J Gastroenterol 93:1042–1050
Chiarioni G, Nardo A, Vantini I et al (2010) Biofeedback is superior to electrogalvanic stimulation and massage for treatment of levator ani syndrome. Gastroenterology 138:1321–1329
Noelting J, Ratuapli SK (2012) Normal values for high-resolution anorectal manometry in healthy women: effects of age and significance of rectoanal gradient. Am J Gastroenterol 107:1530–1536
Liu J, Guaderrama N, Nager CW et al (2006) Functional correlates of anal canal anatomy: puborectalis muscle and anal canal pressure. Am J Gastroenterol 101(5):1092–1097
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Yuwei Li and Xiaoqing Yang contributed equally to this article as joint first authors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, Y., Yang, X., Xu, C. et al. Normal values and pressure morphology for three-dimensional high-resolution anorectal manometry of asymptomatic adults: a study in 110 subjects. Int J Colorectal Dis 28, 1161–1168 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-013-1706-9
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-013-1706-9