Fabio Chistolini

long-term Study on the Effects of Visual Biofeedback and Muscle Training as a Therapeutic Modality in Pelvic Floor Dyssynergia and Slow-transit Constipation

PURPOSE: Biofeedback training has been shown as an effective therapeutic measure in patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia, at least in the short term. Long-term effects have received less attention. Moreover, its effects in patients with slow-transit constipation have been scarcely investigated. This study was designed to assess in an objective way the medium- and long-term effects of biofeedback and muscle training in patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia and slow-transit constipation. METHODS: Twenty-four patients (14 with pelvic floor dyssynergia and 10 with slow transit) meeting the Rome II criteria for constipation, and unresponsive to conventional treatments, entered the study. Clinical evaluation and anorectal manometry were performed basally and three months after a cycle of electromyographic biofeedback and muscle training; moreover, a clinical interview was obtained one year after biofeedback. Patients with slow-transit constipation also had colonic transit time reassessed at one year. RESULTS: Clinical variables (abdominal pain, straining, number of evacuations/week, use of laxatives) all significantly improved in both groups at three-month assessment; anorectal manometric variables remained unchanged, apart from a significant decrease of sensation threshold in the pelvic floor dyssynergia group and of the maximum rectal tolerable volume in the slow-transit constipation group. At one-year control, 50 percent of patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia still maintained a beneficial effect from biofeedback, whereas only 20 percent of those complaining of slow-transit constipation did so. Moreover, the latter displayed no improvement in colonic transit time. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia are likely to have continued benefit from biofeedback training in the time course, whereas its effects on slow-transit constipation seems to be maximal in the short-term course.

Biofeedback for pelvic floor dysfunction in constipation

Pelvic floor dyssynergia is one of the commonest subtypes of constipation, and the conventional treatment (dietary fibre and laxatives) is often unsatisfactory. Recently biofeedback training has been introduced as an alternative treatment. The authors review the evidence for this approach and conclude that, although controlled studies are few and open to criticism, about two thirds of patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia should benefit from biofeedback training Chronic constipation is a common self reported gastrointestinal problem that affects between 2% and 34% of adults in various populations studied. Among the subtypes of constipation, obstructed defecation seems particularly common, occurring in about 7% of the adult population.1 In most people with this conditionan inappropriate (paradoxical) contraction or a failed relaxation of the puborectal muscle and of the external anal sphincter often occurs during attempts to defecate (fig 1). This paradoxical contraction of the pelvic floor muscles during straining at defecation is considered a form of maladaptive learning and is generally defined (without specifying the underlying pathophysiological mechanism) as outlet dysfunction constipation or, more precisely, pelvic floor dyssynergia.2 Fig 1 Anorectal manometric tracings of a normal subject (upper tracing) and a patient with pelvic floor dyssynergia (lower tracing) during straining at defecation (arrows). Note that the normal subject relaxes the anal sphincter, whereas the patient displays a paradoxical contraction of the sphincter Cardinal symptoms of pelvic floor dyssynergia are straining at stools and feelings of incomplete evacuation, and the diagnostic criteria, recently updated in the Rome II report, include those for functional constipation (see box)3 plus at least two out of three investigations (radiology, manometry, and electromyography) showing inappropriate contraction or failure to relax the pelvic floor muscles during attempts to defecate.2 #### Summary points Obstructed defecation is a common subtype of constipation that may not be responsive to treatment with laxatives and dietary …

Abnormal colonic propagated activity in patients with slow transit constipation and constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome

Background: The pathophysiological basis of constipation is still unclear, and the role of colonic dysfunction is debated, especially in irritable bowel syndrome. Objective data are quite scarce, especially concerning colonic propulsive activity. Aims: To evaluate high- and low-amplitude colonic propulsive activity in constipated patients (slow-transit type and irritable bowel syndrome) in comparison with normal controls. Patients and Methods: Forty-five constipated patients (35 with slow-transit constipation and 10 with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome) were recruited, and their data compared to those of 18 healthy subjects. Twenty-four-hour colonic manometric recordings were obtained in the three groups of subjects, and data concerning high- and low-amplitude colonic propulsive activity were then compared. Results: High-amplitude propagated contractions were significantly (p < 0.05) decreased in patients with slow-transit constipation and constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome with respect to controls (1.5 ± 0.4, 3.7 ± 2, and 6 ± 1 events/subject/day, respectively). In slow-transit constipation, a significant decrease of contractions’ amplitude was also observed. Concerning low-amplitude propagated contractions, patients with slow-transit constipation had significantly less events with respect to patients with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (46 ± 7 vs. 87.4 ± 19, p = 0.015); no differences were found between patients with slow-transit constipation and controls and between patients with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome and controls. All three groups displayed a significant increase of low-amplitude propagated contractions after meals (6.3 ± 2 vs. 18.2 ± 5 for controls, p < 0.005; 6.4 ± 1.4 vs. 16.3 ± 2.4 for slow-transit constipation, p < 0.005; 10.5 ± 3.2 vs. 32.6 ± 7 for constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome, p = 0.001). Conclusions: Low-amplitude propagated contractions may represent an important physiologic motor event in constipated patients, reducing the severity of constipation in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and preserving a residual colonic propulsive activity in patients with slow-transit constipation.

Twenty-four-hour manometric study of colonic propulsive activity in patients with diarrhea due to inflammatory (ulcerative colitis) and non-inflammatory (irritable bowel syndrome) conditions.

BackgroundLittle is known concerning colonic motility and almost nothing is known concerning propulsive activity in pathological conditions characterized by diarrhea of both inflammatory and non-inflammatory origin.AimsThe purpose of the present study was to investigate colonic propulsive activity in ulcerative colitis and diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients.Patients and methodsSeven patients with active, moderate ulcerative colitis and nine diarrhea-predominant IBS patients entered the study. Sixteen healthy volunteers were recruited as a control group. In all subjects, 24-h colonic motility was recorded by a colonoscopically positioned manometric catheter. Both high- (mass movements) and low-amplitude propagated contractions were analyzed.ResultsHigh-amplitude propagated contractions were significantly increased in ulcerative colitis with respect to controls; no significant differences were found with respect to IBS patients, and between IBS and controls. Concerning amplitude, no significant difference was found between groups, although IBS patients approached the statistical difference with respect to controls. Low-amplitude propagated contractions were significantly increased in ulcerative colitis with respect to controls; no significant differences were found compared with IBS patients. The latter, however, displayed a trend toward an increase with respect to controls that approached but did not reach statistical significance.ConclusionsBoth inflammatory and non-inflammatory diarrheal conditions are characterized by an overall increase of colonic propulsive activity. This observation may be useful for a better understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of these disorders.

one-year Follow-up Study on the Effects of Electrogalvanic Stimulation in Chronic Idiopathic Constipation With Pelvic Floor Dyssynergia

BACKGROUNDConstipation is a commonly reported symptom, and pelvic floor dyssynergia is frequently documented in constipated patients. The standard therapeutic approach for pelvic floor dyssynergia is biofeedback training, but long-term studies show that a significant percentage of patients remain symptomatic. Alternative or adjunctive therapeutic options are needed.AIMSThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of electrogalvanic stimulation in patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia and severe constipation, to see whether this treatment may be of some benefit.PATIENTS AND METHODSThirty consecutive constipated patients with clinical and instrumental evidence of pelvic floor dyssynergia entered the study and were treated with a standard high-frequency galvanic electrostimulation protocol. Clinical and instrumental (colon transit time, anorectal manometry, defecography, rectal balloon expulsion) assessment evaluations were performed basally and one year after the treatment.RESULTSOverall, approximately 50 percent of patients showed significant improvement after electrogalvanic treatment, from both a clinical and an instrumental point of view, as shown by the objective measurements obtained through manometry, defecography, and the balloon expulsion test. The benefit was limited to normal transit constipation patients.CONCLUSIONSBecause of the relatively simple, painless and effective nature of electrogalvanic stimulation, we concluded that it may represent a useful adjunct to the therapeutic armamentarium for pelvic floor dyssynergia in normal transit constipation.

Are colonic regular contractile frequency patterns in slow transit constipation a relevant pathophysiological phenomenon

BACKGROUND Pathogenesis of slow transit constipation still remains elusive. Some studies have shown several colonic motor abnormalities; however, it is not easy to understand the relative importance of the single ones. AIMS Since it has been hypothesized that an excess of periodic distal motor activity may be of pathophysiological importance in patients with slow transit constipation, we evaluated regular colonic contractile frequencies in a homogeneous cohort of these patients. PATIENTS A total of 26 female patients (age range 34 to 67 years) fulfilling the Rome II criteria for constipation entered the study. No patient had evidence of secondary forms of constipation and distal obstruction. METHODS Twenty-four hour colonic manometric studies were obtained for each patient. Regular contractile patterns (with frequencies ranging from 2 to 8 cycles/min) were calculated for the entire recording period and in single colonic segments. RESULTS Overall, regular patterns accounted for about 3% of the total colonic motor activity (average 30 min/day per subject), with the 3 cycles/min being the predominant contractile rhythm. Most of this activity was present in the sigmoid colon, accounting for >50% of the total amount of motility, and it was more prevalent than in the descending and transverse colon; no differences were revealed in the descending with respect to the transverse colon. No daily fluctuations of regular contractile activity, nor a cyclic pattern, nor migration between recording points were observed. CONCLUSIONS Regular colonic frequency patterns are probably of minor pathophysiological importance in slow transit constipation, even in the light of the scant amount of such phenomena previously documented in healthy subjects.

Pharmacological treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: a critical assessment

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is currently defined as a chronic painful abdominal symptom complex arising from altered intestinal function and without discernible underlying structural changes in the gut (1). Since IBS is one of the most frequent complaints related to the gastrointestinal tract in subjects both seeking and not seeking medical attention (2), in recent years there has been considerable interest in developing diagnostic criteria, the most recent being the socalled Rome II criteria (3). Classically, patients with IBS may be subdivided into three groups, each representing about onethird of the overall population: patients with predominance of constipation, patients with predominance of diarrhoea, and patients with alternating bowel habits (4): unfortunately, in most therapeutic trials described in the literature IBS patients have not been subdivided into types, so potential benefits for subgroups may have been lost. Although IBS is frequent in clinical practice, it is worth noting that to date there are only a few studies offering convincing evidence of drug effectiveness in treating the symptom complex of this syndrome (5), as also shown by the variety of compounds employed. Moreover, most of the available literature trials suffer from methodological problems (see below) (6). This review assesses the current pharmacological options for treating IBS, with emphasis on the (few) solid data showing efficacy.