Paradoxical Puborectalis Contraction and Increased Perineal Descent

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Paradoxical puborectalis contraction and increased perineal descent are two forms of functional constipation presenting as challenging diagnostic and treatment dilemmas to the clinician. In the evaluation of these disorders, the clinician should take special care to exclude anatomic disorders leading to constipation. Physical examination is supplemented by additional diagnostic modalities such as cinedefecography, electromyography, manometry, and pudendal nerve tefninal motor latency. Generally, these investigations should be used in combination with the two playing the more relied upon techniques. Treatment is typically conservative with biofeedback playing a principal role with favorable results when patient compliance is emphasized. When considering paradoxical puborectalis contraction, failure of biofeedback is usually augmented with botulinum toxin injection. Increased perineal descent is generally treated with biofeedback and perineal support maneuvers. Surgery has little or no role in these conditions. The patient who insists on surgical intervention for either of these two conditions should be offered a stoma.

REFERENCES

• 1 Deveaux P J, Galandiuk S. Etiology of Acquired Colorectal Disease: Constipation. 2nd ed. London; Springer-Verlag 2006: 15-24
  Google Scholar
• 2 Jorge J M. Initial Evaluation of Constipation. 2nd ed. London; Springer-Verlag 2006: 35-48
  Google Scholar
• 3 Lau C W, Heymen S, Alabaz O, Iroatulam A J, Wexner S D. Prognostic significance of rectocele, intussusception, and abnormal perineal descent in biofeedback treatment for constipated patients with paradoxical puborectalis contraction.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;  43(4) 478-482
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Shelton A A, Welton M L. The pelvic floor in health and disease.  Western J Med. 1997;  167(2) 90-98
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Leroi A M, Berkelmans I, Denis P, Hemond M, Devroede G. Anismus as a marker of sexual abuse. Consequences of abuse on anorectal motility.  Dig Dis Sci. 1995;  40(7) 1411-1416
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Jorge J M, Wexner S D, Ger G C et al.. Cinedefecography and electromyography in the diagnosis of nonrelaxing puborectalis syndrome.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1993;  36(7) 668-676
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Lowry A C, Simmang C L, Boulos P 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) 915-919
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Mellgren A F, Zetterstrom J, Nilsson B Y. Electromyography and Pudendal Nerve Terminal Motor Latency. 2nd ed. London; Springer-Verlag 2006: 105-109
  Google Scholar
• 9 Johansson C, Nilsson B Y, Holmstrom B, Dolk A. Is paradoxical sphincter reaction provoked by needle electrode electromyography?.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1991;  34(12) 1109-1112
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Agachan F, Pfeifer J, Wexner S D. Defecography and proctography. Results of 744 patients.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1996;  39(8) 899-905
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Choi J S, Wexner S D, Nam Y S et al.. Intraobserver and interobserver measurements of the anorectal angle and perineal descent in defecography.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;  43(8) 1121-1126
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Ekberg O, Nylander G, Fork F T. Defecography.  Radiol. 1985;  155(1) 45-48
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Yeh C Y, Pikarsky A, Wexner S D et al.. Electromyographic findings of paradoxical puborectalis contraction correlate poorly with cinedefecography.  Tech Coloproctol. 2003;  7(2) 77-81
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Wexner S D, Cheape J D, Jorge J M, Heymen S, Jagelman D G. Prospective assessment of biofeedback for the treatment of paradoxical puborectalis contraction.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1992;  35(2) 145-150
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Enck P. Biofeedback training in disordered defecation. A critical review.  Dig Diseases and Sci. 1993;  38(11) 1953-1960
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Vickers D E. Biofeedback for Constipation. 2nd ed. London; Springer-Verlag 2006: 117-134
  Google Scholar
• 17 Glia A, Gylin M, Gullberg K, Lindberg G. Biofeedback retraining in patients with functional constipation and paradoxical puborectalis contraction: comparison of anal manometry and sphincter electromyography for feedback.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1997;  40(8) 889-895
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Karlbom U, Hallden M, Eeg-Olofsson K E, Pahlman L, Graf W. Results of biofeedback in constipated patients: a prospective study.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1997;  40(10) 1149-1155
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Ko C Y, Tong J, Lehman R E et al.. Biofeedback is effective therapy for fecal incontinence and constipation.  Arch Surg. 1997;  132(8) 829-833
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Gilliland R, Heymen S, Altomare D F et al.. Outcome and predictors of success of biofeedback for constipation.  Brit J Surg. 1997;  84(8) 1123-1126
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Hull T L, Fazio V W, Schroeder T. Paradoxical puborectalis contraction in patients after pelvic pouch construction.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1995;  38(11) 1144-1146
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Dailianas A, Skandalis N, Rimikis M N et al.. Pelvic floor study in patients with obstructive defecation: influence of biofeedback.  J Clin Gastroenterol. 2000;  30(2) 176-180
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Joo J S, Agachan F, Wolff  B, Nogueras J J, Wexner S D. Initial North American experience with botulinum toxin type A for treatment of anismus.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1996;  39(10) 1107-1111
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Maria G, Brisinda G, Bentivoglio A R, Cassetta E, Albanese A. Botulinum toxin in the treatment of outlet obstruction constipation caused by puborectalis syndrome.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;  43(3) 376-380
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Shafik A, El-Sibai O. Botulin toxin in the treatment of nonrelaxing puborectalis syndrome.  Dig Surg. 1998;  15(4) 347-351
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Ron Y, Avni Y, Lukovetski A et al.. Botulinum toxin type-A in therapy of patients with anismus.  Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;  44(12) 1821-1826
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Maria G, Cadeddu F, Brandara F, Marniga G, Brisinda G. Experience with type A botulinum toxin for treatment of outlet-type constipation.  Amer J Gastroenterol. 2006;  101(11) 2570-2575
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Yoshioka K, Keighley M R. Clinical results of colectomy for severe constipation.  Brit J Surg. 1989;  76(6) 600-604
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Barnes P R, Hawley P R, Preston D M, Lennard-Jones J E. Experience of posterior division of the puborectalis muscle in the management of chronic constipation.  Brit J Surg. 1985;  72(6) 475-477
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Wiesel P H, Norton C, Glickman S, Kamm M A. Pathophysiology and management of bowel dysfunction in multiple sclerosis.  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2001;  13(4) 441-448
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Chia Y W, Gill K P, Jameson J S et al.. Paradoxical puborectalis contraction is a feature of constipation in patients with multiple sclerosis.  J Neurol Neurosurg Psych. 1996;  60(1) 31-35
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Gill K P, Chia Y W, Henry M M, Shorvon P J. Defecography in multiple sclerosis patients with severe constipation.  Radiol 1994;  191(2) 553-556
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Wiesel P H, Norton C, Roy A J et al.. Gut focused behavioural treatment (biofeedback) for constipation and faecal incontinence in multiple sclerosis.  J Neurol Neurosurg Psych. 2000;  69(2) 240-243
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Karasick S, Karasick D, Karasick S R. Functional disorders of the anus and rectum: findings on defecography.  AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993;  160(4) 777-782
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Porter N H. A physiological study of the pelvic floor in rectal prolapse.  Ann Roy Coll Surg Engl. 1962;  31 379-404
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Ambrose S, Keighley M R. Outpatient measurement of perineal descent.  Ann Roy Coll Surg Engl. 1985;  67(5) 306-308
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Berkelmans I, Heresbach D, Leroi A M et al.. Perineal descent at defecography in women with straining at stool: a lack of specificity or predictive value for future anal incontinence?.  Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1995;  7(1) 75-79
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Henry M M, Parks A G, Swash M. The pelvic floor musculature in the descending perineum syndrome.  Brit J Surg. 1982;  69(8) 470-472
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 39 Parks A G, Porter N H, Hardcastle J. The syndrome of the descending perineum.  Proc Roy Soc Med. 1966;  59(6) 477-482
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 40 Ikenberry S, Lappas J C, Hana M P, Rex D K. Defecography in healthy subjects: comparison of three contrast media.  Radiol. 1996;  201(1) 233-238
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 41 Mahieu P, Pringot J, Bodart P. Defecography: II. Contribution to the diagnosis of defecation disorders.  Gastrointest Radiol. 1984;  9(3) 253-261
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 42 Jorge J M, Ger G C, Gonzalez L, Wexner S D. Patient position during cinedefecography. Influence on perineal descent and other measurements.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1994;  37(9) 927-931
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 43 Mahieu P, Pringot J, Bodart P. Defecography: I. Description of a new procedure and results in normal patients.  Gastrointest Radiol. 1984;  9(3) 247-251
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 44 Jorge J M, Wexner S D, Ehrenpreis E D, Nogueras J J, Jagelman D G. Does perineal descent correlate with pudendal neuropathy?.  Dis Colon Rectum. 1993;  36(5) 475-483
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 45 Bartolo D C, Jarratt J A, Read M G, Donnelly T C, Read N W. The role of partial denervation of the puborectalis in idiopathic faecal incontinence.  Brit J Surg. 1983;  70(11) 664-667
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 46 Bartolo D C, Roe A M, Mortensen N J. The relationship between perineal descent and denervation of the puborectalis in continent patients.  Int J Colorectal Dis. 1986;  1(2) 91-95
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 47 Cundiff G W, Harris R L, Coates K et al.. Abdominal sacral colpoperineopexy: a new approach for correction of posterior compartment defects and perineal descent associated with vaginal vault prolapse.  Amer J Obst Gyn. 1997;  177(6) 1345-1353
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 48 Link R E, Su L M, Bhayani S B, Wright E J. Laparoscopic sacral colpoperineopexy for treatment of perineal body descent and vaginal vault prolapse.  Urol. 2004;  64(1) 145-147
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Steven D WexnerM.D. 

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida

2950 Cleveland Clinic Blvd., Weston, FL 33331

Email: wexners@ccf.org