Which method is best for imaging of anal sphincter defects?
G. Santoro
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0b013e318251db02
2012-06-01
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
Abstract:DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTuM VOLuME 55: 6 (2012) Anal sphincter disruption occurring during vaginal delivery is by far the most common cause of fecal incontinence; consequently, this problem is more prevalent in women than in men. Various treatment options are available for patients with fecal incontinence, including diet or medications, biofeedback, sphincter repair, artificial bowel sphincter, graciloplasty, sacral nerve stimulation, and injection of bulking agents. Accurate assessment of the anal sphincters is therefore fundamental in choosing the appropriate option. Thus, it is important to ask which technique is optimal for imaging of anal sphincter defects. Magnetic resonance imaging is an excellent tool for evaluating sphincter abnormalities and structural causes of incontinence. However, because of cost and access restrictions, MRI is currently performed only occasionally. Endoanal ultrasound is firmly established as one of the cornerstones of a colorectal diagnostic workup and has been recommended by the International urogynecological Association/International Continence Society joint report as the criterion standard for the identification of anal sphincter injury. ultrasound has several important advantages over MRI, including relative ease of use, minimal discomfort, cost-effectiveness, relatively small amount of time consumed, and wide availability. Although, like all ultrasound examinations, endoanal ultrasound is operator dependent, it has shown good interand intraobserver reliability with regard to sphincter injury. Endoanal ultrasound can differentiate between incontinent patients with intact anal sphincters and those with sphincter lesions (tears, scarring, thinning, and thickening), identifying whether a combined lesion of the internal and external anal sphincters exists, or whether the lesion involves just one muscle, and defining the number and circumferential extension of the defects. In addition, endoanal ultrasound is effective in the postoperative assessment of anterior sphincter repair in order to identify residual sphincter defects or for evaluation after injection of a bulking agent implant. However, with 2-dimensional endoanal ultrasound (2D-EAuS) and axial images, the anal sphincter muscles are usually described at 3 levels only (the upper, middle, or lower third of the anal canal) and the radial extent of the defect is expressed in hours of the clock. The recent development of 3-dimensional endoanal ultrasound (3D-EAuS) has further improved diagnostic confidence by providing measurements of length, thickness, area of sphincter damage in different planes, and volume of the remaining intact sphincter muscle. The ability of 3DEAuS to review images in all projections resembles MRI, but the resolution appears to be better. The presence of a sphincter defect does not necessarily mean that it will cause fecal incontinence. As demonstrated by endoanal ultrasound, many women have clinically occult anal sphincter injuries after a vaginal delivery without having symptoms of incontinence. However, fecal incontinence can develop later in their life because of muscle degeneration or atrophy, with the contribution of ageand hormone-related factors and pudendal neuropathy. Inability to demonstrate external anal sphincter atrophy represents a limitation of endoanal ultrasound, first because fatty infiltration cannot be distinguished from normal muscle tissue, and second because the boundaries of the external anal sphincter are difficult to determine. In this particular setting, MRI is valuable because fat results in a hyperintense signal and is therefore recognizable within the hypointense external anal sphincter, and the delineation of the greater part of the external anal sphincter from the surrounding tissues is clear. Thus, atrophy of the external anal sphincter can be easily demonstrated with MRI. Three-dimensional transperineal ultrasound (3DTPuS) represents another method, familiar to urogynecologists, for demonstrating the morphologic characteristics and normal biometry of the anal sphincter complex and for detecting anatomical defects. As reported in this issue, Oom et al found good agreement between 3D-TPuS and 2D-EAuS regarding the detection of anal sphincter lesions and suggested that 3D-TPuS might be considered a valuable alternative noninvasive investigation method. There is no doubt that an advantage of the transperineal approach over the endoanal approach is that the transperineal approach avoids artifactual changes in measurements that Which Method Is Best for Imaging of Anal Sphincter Defects? Editorial