Top

International Journal of Colorectal Disease

Published in:

01-03-2018 | Original Article

Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency testing does not provide useful information in guiding therapy for fecal incontinence

Authors: Julia T. Saraidaridis, George Molina, Lieba R. Savit, Holly Milch, Tiffany Mei, Samantha Chin, James Kuo, Liliana Bordeianou

Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease | Issue 3/2018

Abstract

Purpose

Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency (PNTML) testing is a standard recommendation for the evaluation of fecal incontinence. Its role in guiding therapy for fecal incontinence has been previously questioned. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between PNTML testing and anorectal dysfunction.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively from patients who presented to a pelvic floor disorder center from 2007 to 2015. The relationship between PNTML (normal versus delayed) and anorectal manometry, fecal incontinence severity, and fecal incontinence-related quality of life scores was assessed using the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test.

Results

Two hundred sixty-nine patients underwent PNTML testing, and 91.1% were female (N = 245) (median age 62.2 years). Normal PNTML was seen in 234 (87.0%) patients. Among 268 patients who underwent anorectal manometry, delayed PNTML was only significantly associated with median maximum anal squeeze pressure (P = 0.04). Delayed PNTML was not associated with a decrease in median fecal incontinence severity or fecal incontinence-related quality of life scores (N = 99).

Conclusions

PNTML was only associated with median maximum anal squeeze pressure, and it was not associated with patient-reported severity of symptoms of fecal incontinence, changes in quality of life attributable to fecal incontinence, median mean resting anal pressure, or median maximum resting anal pressure. PNTML testing may not be relevant to current therapeutic algorithms for fecal incontinence and its routine use should be questioned.

Rockwood TH, Church JM, Fleshman JW, Kane RL, Mavrantonis C, Thorson AG, Wexner SD, Bliss D, Lowry AC (1999) Patient and surgeon ranking of the severity of symptoms associated with fecal incontinence: the fecal incontinence severity index. Dis Colon Rectum 42(12):1525–1532. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02236199 CrossRefPubMed

Rockwood TH, Church JM, Fleshman JW, Kane RL, Mavrantonis C, Thorson AG, Wexner SD, Bliss D, Lowry AC (2000) Fecal incontinence quality of life scale: quality of life instrument for patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 43(1):9–16; discussion 16-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237236 CrossRefPubMed

Parks AG, Swash M, Urich H (1977) Sphincter denervation in anorectal incontinence and rectal prolapse. Gut 18(8):656–665. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.18.8.656 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kiff ES, Swash M (1984) Slowed conduction in the pudendal nerves in idiopathic (neurogenic) faecal incontinence. Br J Surg 71(8):614–616. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800710817 CrossRefPubMed

Cheong DM, Vaccaro CA, Salanga VD, Wexner SD, Phillips RC, Hanson MR, Waxner SD (1995) Electrodiagnostic evaluation of fecal incontinence. Muscle Nerve 18(6):612–619. https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.880180608 CrossRefPubMed

Vernava AM 3rd, Longo WE, Daniel GL (1993) Pudendal neuropathy and the importance of EMG evaluation of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36(1):23–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02050297 CrossRefPubMed

Hawkins AT, Olariu AG, Savitt LR, Gingipally S, Wakamatsu MM, Pulliam S, Weinstein MM, Bordeianou L (2016) Impact of rising grades of internal rectal intussusception on fecal continence and symptoms of constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 59(1):54–61. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000510 CrossRefPubMed

Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG (2009) Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 42(2):377–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 CrossRefPubMed

Rogers J, Henry MM, Misiewicz JJ (1988) Disposable pudendal nerve stimulator: evaluation of the standard instrument and new device. Gut 29(8):1131–1133. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.29.8.1131 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Lowry AC et al Consensus statement of definitions for anorectal physiology and rectal cancer: report of the tripartite consensus conference on definitions for anorectal physiology and rectal cancer, Washington, D.C., May 1, 1999. Dis Colon Rectum, 2001 44(7): p. 915–9

11.

Rieger NA, Sarre RG, Saccone GTP, Schloithe AC, Wattchow DA (1997) Correlation of pudendal nerve terminal motor latency with the results of anal manometry. Int J Color Dis 12(5):303–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003840050111 CrossRef

12.

Suilleabhain CB et al (2001) The relationship of pudendal nerve terminal motor latency to squeeze pressure in patients with idiopathic fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 44(5):666–671. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02234563 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Ricciardi R, Mellgren AF, Madoff RD, Baxter NN, Karulf RE, Parker SC (2006) The utility of pudendal nerve terminal motor latencies in idiopathic incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 49(6):852–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-006-0529-y CrossRefPubMed

14.

Loganathan A, Schloithe AC, Hakendorf P, Liyanage CM, Costa M, Wattchow D (2013) Prolonged pudendal nerve terminal motor latency is associated with decreased resting and squeeze pressures in the intact anal sphincter. Color Dis 15(11):1410–1415. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12368 CrossRef

15.

Felt-Bersma RJ, Cuesta MA, Koorevaar M (1996) Anal sphincter repair improves anorectal function and endosonographic image. A prospective clinical study. Dis Colon Rectum 39(8):878–885. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02053986 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Engel AF, Kamm MA, Sultan AH, Bartram CI, Nicholls RJ (1994) Anterior anal sphincter repair in patients with obstetric trauma. Br J Surg 81(8):1231–1234. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800810853 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Laurberg S, Swash M, Henry MM (1988) Delayed external sphincter repair for obstetric tear. Br J Surg 75(8):786–788. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800750821

18.

Londono-Schimmer EE, Garcia-Duperly R, Nicholls RJ, Ritchie JK, Hawley PR, Thomson JPS (1994) Overlapping anal sphincter repair for faecal incontinence due to sphincter trauma: five year follow-up functional results. Int J Color Dis 9(2):110–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00699424 CrossRef

19.

Gilliland R, Altomare DF, Moreira H Jr, Oliveira L, Gilliland JE, Wexner SD (1998) Pudendal neuropathy is predictive of failure following anterior overlapping sphincteroplasty. Dis Colon Rectum 41(12):1516–1522. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237299 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Birnbaum EH, Stamm L, Rafferty JF, Fry RD, Kodner IJ, Fleshman JW (1996) Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency influences surgical outcome in treatment of rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum 39(11):1215–1221. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02055111 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Fu CW, Stevenson AR (2017) Risk factors for recurrence after laparoscopic ventral rectopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 60(2):178–186. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000710 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Altomare DF, Rinaldi M, Petrolino M, Ripetti V, Masin A, Ratto C, Trerotoli P, Monitillo V, Lobascio P, de Fazio M, Guglielmi A, Memeo V (2004) Reliability of electrophysiologic anal tests in predicting the outcome of sacral nerve modulation for fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 47(6):853–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-0524-0 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Carrington EV, Evers J, Grossi U, Dinning PG, Scott SM, O’Connell PR, Jones JFX, Knowles CH (2014) A systematic review of sacral nerve stimulation mechanisms in the treatment of fecal incontinence and constipation. Neurogastroenterol Motil 26(9):1222–1237. https://doi.org/10.1111/nmo.12388 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Lee JT, Madoff RD, Rockwood TH (2015) Quality-of-life measures in fecal incontinence: is validation valid? Dis Colon Rectum 58(3):352–357. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000290 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency testing does not provide useful information in guiding therapy for fecal incontinence
Authors: Julia T. Saraidaridis
George Molina
Lieba R. Savit
Holly Milch
Tiffany Mei
Samantha Chin
James Kuo
Liliana Bordeianou
Publication date: 01-03-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0179-1958
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1262
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-017-2959-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency testing does not provide useful information in guiding therapy for fecal incontinence

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

Transanal total mesorectal excision: is it necessary in the era of robots?

Impact of transanal drainage tube on anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection

New ultrasonographic evaluation of stool and/or gas distribution for treatment of chronic constipation

Risk of colorectal cancer in patients with periodontal disease severity: a nationwide, population-based cohort study

Low risk of intra-abdominal infections in rectal cancer patients treated with Hartmann’s procedure: a report from a national registry

Long-term quality of life after conservative treatment versus surgery for different stages of acute sigmoid diverticulitis