In the Gray Zone: Few Patients Proceed to Additional Testing After Equivocal Anorectal Manometry and Balloon Expulsion Testing.

内容摘要

Anorectal manometry (ARM) and balloon expulsion testing (BET) are often first-line tests to diagnose dyssynergic defecation (DD), followed by either barium or MR defecography if results are equivocal for a defecatory disorder. However, real-world outcomes for these patients are unclear. We aim to characterize patterns of patient treatment after equivocal results on ARM and BET. A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients who obtained ARM and BET at a single referral motility center between January 2024 and February 2025. Demographic data, results of ARM, BET, and MR defecography if obtained were recorded along with the treatment plan at follow-up. Of 409 charts reviewed, 97 patients with equivocal results were included in the study (81.4% female; mean age of 51.6 ± 18.0) and MR defecography was obtained by 30.9% of patients. Of these, 50.0% had findings consistent with DD and 56.7% had significant structural or anatomic abnormalities. Of the remaining 67 patients (69.1%) who did not obtain MR defecography, 31.3% opted for an empiric trial of biofeedback or pelvic physical therapy (PT), 26.9% continued with optimized medical management alone, whereas 14.4% were lost to follow-up. Fewer than one third of patients obtain MR defecography within 6 months of equivocal ARM and BET; almost half of those had results corroborating a diagnosis of DD or significant structural abnormalities on MR defecography. Among patients who did not obtain MR defecography, most opted for an empiric trial of biofeedback/pelvic PT or optimized medical management. More research is needed to identify which patients will substantively benefit from additional confirmatory testing when there are equivocal results. Anorectal manometry (ARM) and balloon expulsion testing (BET) are often first‐line tests to diagnose dyssynergic defecation (DD), followed by either barium or magnetic resonance (MR) defecography if results are equivocal for a defecatory disorder. However, real‐world outcomes for these patients are unclear. This study aimed to characterize patterns of patient treatment after equivocal results on ARM and BET through retrospective chart review of 97 patients with equivocal ARM and BET results. Fewer than one third of patients obtain MR defecography within 6 months of equivocal ARM and BET; almost half of those had results corroborating a diagnosis of DD or significant structural abnormalities on MR defecography. Among patients who did not obtain MR defecography, most opted for an empiric trial of biofeedback/pelvic PT or optimized medical management. More research is needed to identify which patients will substantively benefit from additional confirmatory testing when there are equivocal results.