Introduction To compare anal sphincter pressure parameters using water-perfused (WP) and a solid-state (SS) HRAM catheter in healthy volunteers using a standardised protocol to provide normal values.
Methods 60 asymptomatic volunteers were studied (20 M/40 F). WP HRAM single-use ano-rectal catheters (ARC), 10 channels, external diameter 14 Fr (MUI Scientific, Canada) and SS HRAM multi-use ARC, 8 channels placed 0.8 cm apart, external diameter of 12 Fr, 16 Fr at sensors (UniSensor AG, Switzerland) both distributed by Ardmore Healthcare, UK. Studies were performed consecutively in a randomised order with the volunteers in the left-lateral position with knees & hips flexed. After a 3 minute familiarisation period, the following test manoeuvres were performed according to a standardised protoco,1 Rest- subject relaxed and lying still, anorectal pressures measured for 1 minute. Cough- asked to cough once maximally. Squeeze- asked to squeeze maximally for 5 seconds. Cough & squeeze manoeuvres were repeated twice. Sensation of maximum rectal capacity was assessed by gradual inflation of the balloon at a rate of 2 ml/sec using an automated pump.
Results Normal values (5 th-95th percentile) for parameters of ano-rectal function in males & females using.
Conclusion Significant differences between the two systems were observed for maximum squeeze increment and maximum cough increment in males & females (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two catheter types in relation to anal canal length, resting pressure or maximum tolerated volume. This study utilised the same manometry system to record and analyse results, making it the first study to directly compare the impact of catheter choice on HRAM in normal volunteers.
Reference 1 Carrington EV, et al. Traditional measures of normal anal sphincter function using HRAM) in 115 healthy volunteers. Neurogastro & Motility 2014;26(5):625–635.
Disclosure of Interest None Declared