scholarly journals Yield and Examiner Dependence of Digital Rectal Examination in Detecting Impaction in Pediatric Functional Constipation

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 570-575
Author(s):  
Shikhar Pradhan ◽  
Barath Jagadisan
Keyword(s):  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Functional Constipation ◽  
Rectal Examination

scholarly journals Digital Rectal Examination Is a Valuable Bedside Tool for Detecting Dyssynergic Defecation: A Diagnostic Study and a Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Jie Liu ◽  
Chaolan Lv ◽  
Yizhou Huang ◽  
Ying Wang ◽  
Dandan Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Functional Constipation ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Diagnostic Study ◽  
Dyssynergic Defecation ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Physiological Tests

Background. Accurate dyssynergic defecation (DD) diagnosis depends on anorectal physiological tests that are not widely available. Aim. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic yield of digital rectal examination (DRE) compared with anorectal physiological tests in diagnosing DD in patients with constipation. Methods. A total of 218 chronic constipation patients who fulfilled the Rome IV diagnostic criteria for functional constipation (FC) and underwent a standardized DRE and high-resolution anorectal manometry (HRAM) test were enrolled in this study. The diagnostic accuracy of DRE compared with HRAM was evaluated, and the agreement between DRE and HRAM was calculated. Furthermore, a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase database was conducted to further elucidate the pooled diagnostic accuracy of DRE in DD patients. Results. A total of 101 patients (46.33%) had a DD pattern using HRAM, while 117 patients (53.67%) were diagnosed without DD. The sensitivity of DRE in diagnosing dyssynergia was 71.3%, and the specificity was 76.1%. There was a moderate agreement between DRE and HRAM for diagnosing DD (κ-coefficient = 0.474, P < 0.001 ). Meanwhile, six studies (including our study) comprising 964 constipated patients were included in our meta-analysis. The outcomes demonstrated that the AUC was 0.85 (95% CI 0.82–0.88) with 77% summary sensitivity (95% CI 65–86) and 80% summary specificity (95% CI 71–86) to diagnose DD. Conclusions. DRE could be a valuable tool for screening DD. Our study revealed acceptable sensitivity and specificity of DRE in detecting dyssynergia compared with the physiological tests. Meanwhile, our study highlights that DRE remains an important tool in clinical practice.

scholarly journals Measurement of Rectal Diameter and Anterior Wall Thickness by Ultrasonography in Children With Chronic Constipation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Güzide Doğan ◽  
Merter KEÇELİ ◽  
Sibel Yavuz ◽  
Adem Topçu ◽  
Erhun Kasırga
Keyword(s):  
Wall Thickness ◽  
Chronic Constipation ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Functional Constipation ◽  
Thickness Measurement ◽  
Anterior Wall ◽  
Symphysis Pubis ◽  
Radiology Department ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Rectal Examination

Abstract Introduction: Measurement of rectal diameter by ultrasonograpy helps the clinician in the diagnosis of chronic constipation in children for whom rectal examination cannot be performed. The aim of the study is to determine the rectal diameter and anterior wall thickness values with constipated and healthy subjects, and to evaluate the usability of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of functional constipation in children for whom refuse digital rectal examination Materials and Methods: The constipated group included 140 children, while the control group included 164 children. All patients were divided into four subgroups according to their ages and were referred to the radiology department for rectal measurements. Results: At the symphysis pubis plane the rectal diameter measurement of the constipated patients with fecal retention positive group was statistically greater than the control group. At the ischial spine plane, rectum diameter of constipated children with fecal retention positive or negative was found to be statistically greater than the control group. At the bladder neck plane rectum diameter of constipated patients with fecal retention positive was statistically greater than the control group. Rectum anterior wall thickness measurement was found to be higher in constipated patients with fecal retention positive compared to the control (p = 0.000). It’s measurements of constipated patients in group II, group III, and group IV with empty rectum were found to be statistically higher than the control group. Conclusion: Measurement of rectal diameter and anterior wall thickness by ultrasonograpy as a noninvasive method in children who do not want the digital rectal examination and may be useful in the diagnosis of constipation.

Diagnosis of Megacolon: The Rectal Examination

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 535-536
Author(s):  
JOHN G. LOEFFLER
Keyword(s):  
Newborn Infant ◽  
Barium Enema ◽  
Chronic Constipation ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Rectal Biopsy ◽  
Functional Constipation ◽  
Diagnostic Dilemma ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Older Child

The following comments pertain to an article in Pediatrics, 36:572, 1965. In their article, "Aganglionic and Functional Megacolon in Children—a Diagnostic Dilemma," Drs. Kottmeier and Clatworthy have done a commendable job in pointing out the pitfalls of diagnosing aganglionic megacolon in the newborn infant. I am afraid, however, that the authors have given the impression that reliance should be made on barium enema and rectal biopsy when distinguishing between aganglionic megacolon and functional constipation in the older child who presents with chronic constipation. In the article no mention was made about the value of a simple digital rectal examination.

scholarly journals Clinical diagnosis of prostate cancer using digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen tests: a systematic review and meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelson C. Okpua ◽  
Simon I. Okekpa ◽  
Stanley Njaka ◽  
Augusta N. Emeh
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Antigen Test ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen Test ◽  
Prostate Cancers ◽  
Antigen Tests

Abstract Background Being diagnosed with cancer, irrespective of type initiates a serious psychological concern. The increasing rate of detection of indolent prostate cancers is a source of worry to public health. Digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen tests are the commonly used prostate cancer screening tests. Understanding the diagnostic accuracies of these tests may provide clearer pictures of their characteristics and values in prostate cancer diagnosis. This review compared the sensitivities and specificities of digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen test in detection of clinically important prostate cancers using studies from wider population. Main body We conducted literature search in PubMed, Medline, Science Direct, Wiley Online, CINAHL, Scopus, AJOL and Google Scholar, using key words and Boolean operators. Studies comparing the sensitivity and specificity of digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen tests in men 40 years and above, using biopsy as reference standard were retrieved. Data were extracted and analysed using Review manager (RevMan 5.3) statistical software. The overall quality of the studies was good, and heterogeneity was observed across the studies. The result comparatively shows that prostate-specific antigen test has higher sensitivity (P < 0.00001, RR 0.74, CI 0.67–0.83) and specificity (P < 0.00001, RR 1.81, CI 1.54–2.12) in the detection of prostate cancers than digital rectal examination. Conclusion Prostate-specific antigen test has higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting prostate cancers from men of multiple ethnic origins. However, combination of prostate-specific antigen test and standardized digital rectal examination procedure, along with patients history, may improve the accuracy and minimize over-diagnoses of indolent prostate cancers.

scholarly journals The Digital Divide: A Retrospective Survey of Digital Rectal Examinations during the Workup of Rectal Cancers

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 855
Author(s):  
Omar Farooq ◽  
Ameer Farooq ◽  
Sunita Ghosh ◽  
Raza Qadri ◽  
Tanner Steed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Care Provider ◽  
Primary Care Provider ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Patient Questionnaire ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Rectal Cancers

Background: Digital rectal examination (DRE) is considered an important part of the physical examination. However, it is unclear how many patients have a DRE performed at the primary care level in the work-up of rectal cancer, and if the absence of a DRE causes a delay to consultation with a specialist. Methods: A retrospective patient questionnaire was sent to 1000 consecutive patients with stage II or stage III rectal cancer. The questionnaire asked patients to recall if they had a DRE performed by their general practitioner (GP) when they first presented with symptoms or a positive FIT test. Demographic data, staging data, and time to consultation with a specialist were also collected. Results: A thousand surveys were mailed out, and a total of 262 patients responded. Of the respondents, 46.2% did not recall undergoing a digital rectal examination by their primary care provider. Women were less likely to undergo a DRE than men (28.6% vs. 44.3%, p = 0.019). While there was a trend towards longer times to specialist consultation in patients who did not undergo a DRE (27.0 vs. 12.2 weeks), this was not statistically significant (p = 0.121). Conclusion: A significant proportion of patients who are FIT positive or have symptomatic rectal bleeding do not recall having a DRE by their primary care provider. Barriers may include lack of comfort with performing DRE or lack of time. Clearer guidelines and more support for GP’s may increase uptake of DRE.

scholarly journals Less is more—the best test for anastomotic leaks in rectal cancer patients prior to ileostomy reversal

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Lindner ◽  
Steffen Eitelbuss ◽  
Svetlana Hetjens ◽  
Joshua Gawlitza ◽  
Julia Hardt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Colorectal Anastomosis ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Contrast Enema ◽  
Paired Data ◽  
Endoscopic Procedures ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Ileostomy Reversal

Abstract Purpose No clear consensus exists on how to routinely assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of contrast enema, endoscopic procedures, and digital rectal examination in rectal cancer patients in this setting. Methods A systematic literature search was performed. Studies assessing at least one index test for which a 2 × 2 table was calculable were included. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated and used for test comparison. Paired data were used where parameters could not be calculated. Methodological quality was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. Results Two prospective and 11 retrospective studies comprising 1903 patients were eligible for inclusion. Paired data analysis showed equal or better results for sensitivity and specificity of both endoscopic procedures and digital rectal examination compared to contrast enema. Subgroup analysis of contrast enema according to methodological quality revealed that studies with higher methodological quality reported poorer sensitivity for equal specificity and vice versa. No case was described where a contrast enema revealed an anastomotic leak that was overseen in digital rectal examination or endoscopic procedures. Conclusions Endoscopy and digital rectal examination appear to be the best diagnostic tests to assess the integrity of the colorectal anastomosis prior to ileostomy reversal. Accuracy measures of contrast enema are overestimated by studies with lower methodological quality. Synopsis of existing evidence and risk–benefit considerations justifies omission of contrast enema in favor of endoscopic and clinical assessment. Trial registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019107771

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document