Skip to main content

Functional Disorders

  • Chapter
Book cover Coloproctology

Abstract

6.1

Continence is defined as the voluntary control of bowel content and the ability of its voluntary emptying. Incontinence is the loss of this ability. Incontinence must also be considered a symptom. Its causes are manifold. Incontinence can be directly related to the anorectal continence organ itself, or be a secondary symptom to various pathological conditions (Table 6.1.1). Traditionally incontinence was described as being sensory, muscular, neurogenic, mixed, psychoorganic and idiopathic. These categories carry limitations as they do not take factors determining continence into consideration, such as:

• Stool frequency

• Stool consistency

• Sphincter strength

• Anorectal sensitivity

• Capacity and compliance of the rectum

Especially with regard to a required therapy, a treatmentoriented structuring makes sense (Table 6.1.1). Incontinence is mostly multifactorial. If incontinence occurs secondary to another underlying disease or disorder, treatment should be directed to the primary. The following is focused on incontinence due to disorders of the anorectal continence organs.

6.2

The term constipation covers several forms and causes of impaired defaecation. The differentiation between acute and chronic constipation is important (Fig. 6.2.1).

• An acute constipation is the sudden inability to empty the bowel. The most common reasons are colonic obstructions (carcinoma, inflammation) or painful anal lesions that lead to sphincter spasm or the inability to relax (e.g. fissure-in-ano, intersphincteric abscess). In particular diverticulitis and colonic carcinoma can lead to a mechanical colonic ileus (obstruction).

• In chronic constipation defaecation is irregular with a frequency of two or less evacuations per week. Another definition is “straining at stool for more than 25% of the time”. Chronic constipation itself can divided into:

- Colonic slow-transit constipation

– Outlet obstruction (Chap. 6.3)

In this chapter, we will concentrate on slow-transit constipation.

6.3

Defaecation disorders refer to the inability to efficiently and rapidly empty the rectum of its contents on demand. They are clearly a source of discomfort and impair significantly the quality of life of affected patients.

Defaecation disorders represent a complex field where throughout detailed assessment of the terminal bowel anatomy and function is needed.

A multi-disciplinary approach as developed in “pelvic floor clinics” is a useful adjunct to the traditional colorectal approach.

Medical treatment and pelvic floor retraining are first-line treatment. Various types of surgical approaches currently designed to correct anatomical abnormalities and improve function can be carried out in selected patients.

In this difficult area of functional disorder, information to the patient and his/her relatives is essential, especially when surgery is considered.

6.4

• Rectal prolapse is an uncommon but disabling condition that requires surgical correction to treat symptoms and prevent progressive anal sphincter damage. The majority of patients complain of perineal pressure and a feeling of “something coming down”. This is commonly associated with mucus discharge or frank faecal soiling. Many patients will describe a protrusion through the anal opening, that may reduce spontaneously, but frequently, with time, manual reduction is required. There is considerable controversy regarding the indications for surgical intervention and the most appropriate surgical technique to be used.

• Rectal intussusception is a common finding at defaecography and may be present in normal subjects; internal rectal prolapse is a term used in patients with obstructed defaecation and in whom this proctographic finding is identified.

• Solitary rectal ulcer is a term used to describe ulceration, usually on the anterior rectal wall, at the level of the puborectalis sling. Local trauma due to repeated straining with intussusception and obstructed defaecation is thought to be responsible.

• In terms of treatment, intussusception and internal prolapse, with or without ulceration, are generally treated conservatively.

6.5

• Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) (synonym: spastic colon) is characterised by abdominal discomfort or pain, associated with altered bowel function (diarrhoea and/ or constipation) and disordered defaecation.

• There are no diagnostic biochemical, physiological or structural abnormalities in IBS.

Over the years groups of experts have developed clinical measures based on positive symptom analysis. Manning and colleagues were the first to propose key symptoms (“Manning criteria”) to help the diagnosis of IBS. The Rome I, II and III criteria are the results of multinational consensus workshops. Table 6.5.1 lists the symptom-based criteria which are so far established for the diagnosis of IBS. The Rome classification system characterises IBS in terms of multiple physiological determinants contributing to a common set of symptoms rather than a single disease entity. The current Rome III criteria subtype IBS according to the stool form by using the Bristol Stool Form Scale.

The IBS-related symptoms overlap with those of other diseases. Experienced clinicians often diagnose these disorders on symptoms alone, but, as functional disorders are so much more common than organic diseases, any diagnostic strategy is likely to have a deceptively high positive predictive value.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Suggested Reading

Chapter 6.1

  1. Baeten CG, Konsten J, Spaans F et al (1991) Dynamic graciloplasty for treatment of faecal incontinence. Lancet 338:1163–1165

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bannister JJ (1987) Effect of aging on anorectal function. Gut 28:353–357

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Felt-Bersma RJF, Cuesta MA (1994) Faecal incontinence 1994: which test and which treatment. Neth J Med 44:182–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Halverson AL, Hull TL (2002) Long-term outcome of overlapping anal sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 45:345–348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Herold A (2002) Anale Inkontinenz. In: Brühl, Herold, Wienert (eds) Aktuelle Proktologie. UNI-MED Science 2002, Bremen

    Google Scholar 

  6. Jorge JMN, Wexner SD (1993) Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36:77–97

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jost WH, Raulf F, Mielke U, Schimirgk K (1992) Rationelle neurologische Diagnostik bei Stuhlinkontinenz. Z Ges Inn Med 47:154–158

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Karulf RE, Coller JA, Bartolo DCC (1991) Anorectal physiology testing. A survey of availability and use. Dis Colon Rectum 34:464–468

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Madoff RD (2004) Surgical treatment options for fecal incontinence. Gastroenterology 126:S48–S54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Madoff RD, Parker SC, Varma MC, Lowry AC (2004) Faecal incontinence in adults. Lancet 364:621–632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Matzel KE, Besendörfer M (2006) Surgery for fecal incontinence. In: Cardozo L, Staskin D (eds) Textbook for female urology and urogynecology, 2nd edn. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 1119–1138

    Google Scholar 

  12. Matzel KE, Stadelmaier U, Hohenfellner M, Gall FP (1995) Electrical stimulation of sacral spinal nerves for treatment of faecal incontinence. Lancet 346:1124–1127

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Niriella DA, Deen KI (2000) Neosphincters in the management of faecal incontinence. Br J Surg 87:1617–1628

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Orrom WJ, Miller R, Comes H, Duthie G, Mortensen NJMcC, Bartolo DCC (1991) Comparison of anterior sphincteroplasty and post anal repair in the treatment of idiopathic fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 34:305–310

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rockwood TH, Church JM, Flesahman JW et al (1999) Patient and surgeon ranking of severity of symptoms associated with fecal incontinence: the fecal incontinence severity index. Dis Colon Rectum 42:1525–1532

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Rockwood TH, Church JM, Fleshman JW et al (2000) Fecal incontinence quality of life scale: quality of life instrument for patients with fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 43:9–17

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rudolph W, Galandiuk S (2002) A practical guide to the diagnosis and management of fecal incontinence. Mayo Clin Proc 77:271–275

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tjandra, J, Kim L, Matzel KE (2004) Sacral nerve stimulation: an emerging treatment for fecal incontinence. ANZ J Surg 74:1098–1106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vaizey CJ, Norton C, Thornton MJ, Nicholls RJ, Kamm MA (2004) Long-term results of repeat anterior anal sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 47:858–863

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wong WD, Jensen LL, Bartolo DCC et al (1996) Artificial anal sphincter. Dis Colon Rectum 39:1345–1351

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Zorcolo L, Covotta L, Bartolo DCC (2005) Outcome of anterior sphincter repair for obstetric injury: comparison of early and late results. Dis Colon Rectum 48:524–531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chapter 6.2

  1. Altomare DF, Rinaldi M, Rubini D et al (2007) Long-term functional assessment of antegrade colonic enema for combined incontinence and constipation using a modified Marsh and Kiff technique. Dis Colon Rectum 50:–1023–1031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Buchmann P, Brühlmann W (1992) Anorectal investigation of functional disorders with special respect to defecography. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  3. Buchmann P, Bruhin R, Sartoretti C, De Lorenzi D (1997) Sphincteropexy: a new operation to cure outlet obstruction in adults. Dig Surg 14:413–418

    Google Scholar 

  4. Burkitt DP, Walker ARP, Painter NS (1972) Effect of dietary fibre on stool and transit-times, and its role in the causation of disease. Lancet 2:1408–1411

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dinning PG, Fuentealba SE, Kennedy ML et al (2007) Sacral nerve stimulation induces pan-colonic propagating pressure waves and increases defecation frequency in patients with slow-transit constipation. Colorectal Dis 9:123–132

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dukas L, Willett WC, Giovannucci EL (2003) Association between physical activity, fiber intake, and other lifestyle variables and constipation in a study of women. Am J Gastroenterol 98:1790–1796

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gladman MA, Scott SM, Lunniss PJ, Williams NS (2005) Systematic review of surgical options for idiopathic megarectum and megacolon. Ann Surg 241:562–574

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kamm MA, Lennard-Jones JE (1992) Pathophysiology of constipation. In: Henry MM, Swash M (eds) Coloproctology and the pelvic floor. Butterworths, London

    Google Scholar 

  9. Locke GR, Pemberton JH, Phillips SF (2000) AGA technical review on constipation. Gastroenterology 119:1766–1778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nyam DC, Pemberton JH, Ilstrup DM, Rath MD (1997) Long-term results of surgery for chronic constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 40:273–279

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Pemberton JH (1992) Management of constipation. In: Henry MM, Swash M (eds) Coloproctology and the pelvic floor. Butterworths, London

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pfeifer J, Agachan F, Wexner SC (1996) Surgery for constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 39:444–460

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rao SS, Tuteja AK, Vellema T et al (2004) Dyssynergic defecation: demographics, symptoms, stool pattern, and quality of life. J Clin Gastroenterol 38:680–685

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sewart WF, Liberman JN, Sandler RS et al (1999) Epidemiology of constipation (EPOC) study in the United States: relationship of clinical subtypes to socioeconomic features. Am J Gastoenterol 94:3530–3540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Thompson WG, Longstreth GF, Drossman DA et al (1999) Functional bowel disorders and functional abdominal pain. Gut 45(suppl 2:II):43–47

    Google Scholar 

Chapter 6.3

  1. Boccasanta P, Carriero A, Stuto A, Caviglia A (2004) Stapled rectal resection for obstructed defecation. A prospective multicenter trial. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1285–1297

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chaussade S, Khyari A, Roche H et al (1989) Determination of total and segmental colonic transit time in constipated patients. Dig Dis Sci 34:1168–1172

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. DeLancey JOL (1999) Structural anatomy of the posterior pelvic compartment as it relates to rectocele. Am J Obstet Gynecol 180:815–823

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Gladman MA, Scott SM, Williams NS, Lunniss PJ (2003) Clinical and physiological findings, and possible aetological factors of rectal hyposensitivity. Br J Surg 90:860–866

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Heriot AG, Skull A, Kumar D (2004) Functional and physiological outcome following transanal repair of rectocele. Br J Surg 91:1340–1344

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Heymen S, Jones, KR Scarlett Y, Whitehead WE (2003) Biofeedback treatment of constipation: a critical review. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1208–1217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jean F, Tanneau Y, Le Blanc-Louvy AA, Leroi M, Denis P, Michot F (2002) Treatment of enterocele by abdominal colporectosacropexy: efficacy on pelvic pressure. Colorectal Dis 4:321–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kahn MA, Stanton SI (1997) Posterior colporrhaphy: its effects on bowel and sexual function. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104:882–886

    Google Scholar 

  9. Knowles CH, Eccersley AJ, Scott SM, Walker SM, Reeves B, Lunniss PJ (2000) Linear discriminant analysis of symptoms in patients with chronic constipation: validation of a new scoring system (KESS). Dis Colon Rectum 43:1419–1426

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lehur PA, Hamy A (2000) Cure chirurgicale des rectocèles par voie périnéo-vaginale: plicature rectale, sacro-spinofixation vaginale et périnéorraphie postérieure. J Chir 137:165–169

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mellgren A, Bremmer S, Johansson C et al (1994) Defecography: results of investigations of 2816 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 37:1133–1141

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mellgren A, Anzen B, Nilsson BY, Johansson C et al (1995) Results of rectocele repair. A prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum 38:7–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Mellgren A, Lopez A, Schultz I, Anzen B (1998) Rectocele is associated with paradoxical anal sphincter reaction. Int J Colorectal Dis 13:13–16

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Mimura T, Roy AJ, Storrie JB, Kamm MA (2000) Treatment of impaired defecation associated with rectocele by behavioral retraining. Dis Colon Rectum 43:1267–1272

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Richardson AC (1993) The rectovaginal septum revisited: its relationship to rectocele and its importance in rectocele repair. Clin Obstet Gynecol 36:976–983

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Silvis R, Gooszen HG, van Essen A, de Kruif ATCM, Janssen LWM (1999) Abdominal rectovaginopexy: modified technique to treat constipation. Dis Colon Rectum 1999;42:82–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Siproudhis L, Dautreme S, Ropert A, Bretagne JF et al (1993) Dyschezia and rectocele: a marriage of convenience? Physiologic evaluation of the rectocele in a group of 52 women complaining of difficulty in evacuation. Dis Colon Rectum 36:1030–1036

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Stojkovic SG, Balfour L, Burke D, Finan PJ, Sagar PM (2003) Does the need to self digitate or the presence of a large or non emptying rectocele on proctography influence the outcome of transanal rectocele repair? Colorectal Dis 5:169–172

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sullivan ES, Leaverton GH, Hardwick CE (1968) Transrectal perineal repair, an adjunct to improved function after anorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 11:106–114

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Van Dam JH, Schouten WR, Ginai AZ. Huisman WM, Hop WC (1996) The impact of anismus on the clinical outcome of rectocele repair. Int J Colorectal Dis 11:238–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Van Dam JH, Ginai AZ, Gosselink MJ, Huisman WM, Bonjer HJ, Hop WC, Schouten WR (1997) Role of defecography in predicting clinical outcome of rectocele repair. Dis Colon Rectum 40:201–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Van Dam JH, Hop WCJ, Schouten WR (2000) Analysis of patients with poor outcome of rectocele repair. Dis Colon Rectum 43:1544–1550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Yeh CY, Pikarsky A, Wexner SD et al (2003) Electromyographic findings of paradoxical puborectalis contraction correlate poorly with cinedefecography. Tech Coloproctol 7:77–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Chapter 6.4

  1. Brazzelli M, Bachoo P, Grant A (2004) Surgery for complete rectal prolapse in adults (Cochrane Review). From The Cochrane Library, Issue 2. Chichester, UK. www.cochrane.org/cochrane/revabstr/AB001758.htm (2004) Accessed 20 April 2004

    Google Scholar 

  2. D’Hoore A, Cadoni R, Penninckx F (2004) Long-term outcome of laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for total rectal prolapse. Br J Surg 91:1500–1505

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Dolk A, Broden G, Holstrom B, Johansson C, Nilsson BY (1990) Slow transit of the colon associated with severe constipation after the Ripstein procedure. A clinical and physiologic study. Dis Colon Rectum 33:786–790

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Eu KW, Seow-Choen F (1997) Functional problems in adult rectal prolapse and controversies in surgical treatment. Br J Surg 84:904–911

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Madiba TE, Baig MK, Wexner SD (2005) Surgical management of rectal prolapse. Arch Surg 140:63–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Speakman CTM, Madden MV, Nicholls RJ, Kamm MA (1991) Lateral ligament division during rectopexy causes constipation but prevents recurrence: results of a prospective randomized study. Br J Surg 78:1431–1433

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Chapter 6.5

  1. Bonaz BL, Papillon E, Baciu M, Segebarth C, Bost R, LeBas J, Fournet J (2000) Central processing of rectal pain in IBS patients: an MRI study. Gastroenterology 118(suppl):A615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Camilleri M, Heading RC, Thompson WG (2002) Clinical perspectives, mechanisms, diagnosis and management of irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 16:1407–1430

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Corney RH, Stanton R (1990) Physical symptom severity, psychological and social dysfunction in a series of outpatients with irritable bowel syndrome. J Psychosom Res 34:483–491

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dapoigny M (1999) Functional intestinal disorders. Diagnosis and treatment. Rev Prat 49:1559–1564

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. De Giorgio R, Barbara G, Stanghellini V, Cremon C, Salvidi B, De Ponti F, Corinaldesi R (2004) Diagnosis and therapy of irritable bowel syndrom. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 20 Suppl 2:10–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Farthing MJ (2004) Treatment options in irritable bowel syndrome. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 18:773–786

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones R (2000) IBS: prime problem in primary care. Gut 46:7–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Longstreth GF, Drossman DA (2002) New developments in the diagnosis and treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 4:427–434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Longstreth GF, Thompson WG, Chey WD, Houghton LA, Mearin F, Spiller RC (2006) Functional bowel disorders. Gastroenterology 130:1480–1491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Manning AP, Thompson WG, Heaton KW, Morris AF (1978) Towards positive diagnosis of the irritable bowel. BMJ 2:653–654

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Small PK, Loudon MA, Han CM, Noor N, Campbell FC (1997) Large scale ambulatory study of post prandial jejunal motility in irritable bowel syndrome. Scand J Gastroenterol 32:39–47

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Spiller RC (2003) Postinfectious irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 124:1662–1671

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Thompson WG, Longstreth GF, Rossman DA, Heaton KW, Irvine EJ, Muller-Lissner SA (1999) Functional bowel disorders and functional abdominal pain. Gut 45(suppl 2):II43–II47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zimmerman J (2003) Extraintestinal symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel diseases: nature, severity, and relationship to gastrointestinal symptoms. Dig Dis Sci 48:743–749

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Herold, A. et al. (2008). Functional Disorders. In: Herold, A., Lehur, PA., Matzel, K., O'Connell, P. (eds) Coloproctology. European Manual of Medicine. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71217-6_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71217-6_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-71216-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-71217-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics