Meifeng Wang

Background: The London Classification for anorectal physiological dysfunction specifically proposes rectoanal areflexia (RA), which means the absence of a rectoanal inhibitory reflex (RAIR) based on a manometric diagnosis. Although RA is not observed in healthy people, it can be found in adult patients with functional constipation (FC). This study describes the clinical manifestations of adult patients with FC and RA and their response to biofeedback therapy (BFT). Methods: This retrospective study reviewed the reports of high-resolution anorectal manometry (HR-ARM) and the efficacy of BFT in adult patients with FC. In addition, the Constipation Scoring System (CSS) scale, Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM) scale, Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QOL) scale, Zung’s Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), Zung’s Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), balloon expulsion test (BET), and the use of laxatives were assessed. Results: A total of 257 adult patients diagnosed with FC were divided into the RA group (n = 89) and the RAIR group (n = 168). In the RA and RAIR groups, 60 (67.4%) and 117 (69.6%) patients, respectively, had dyssynergic defecation (DD) during simulated defecation. Type II pattern of dyssynergia was most frequently observed in both groups. Compared with the RA group, the RAIR group showed a higher CSS score, physical discomfort score, and prevalence of inadequate relaxation of the anal sphincter (p < 0.001, p = 0.036, and p = 0.017, respectively). The anxiety and depression scores were not different between the two groups. The proportion of patients using volumetric and stimulant laxatives and their combination was significantly higher in FC patients with RA, whereas the efficacy of BFT was significantly lower (p = 0.005, p < 0.001, p = 0.045, and p = 0.010, respectively). Conclusion: Adult FC patients with RA may suffer more severe constipation and have a lower efficacy of BFT compared with those with RAIR.

Goals: A combination of multiple tests was introduced to noninvasively investigate the differences in pathophysiologies among functional dyspepsia (FD) subgroups, including postprandial distress syndrome (PDS), epigastric pain syndrome (EPS), and overlap. Background: It has not been extensively evaluated whether different pathophysiologies are involved in FD subgroups. Study: This multicenter study included 364 FD patients fulfilling Rome IV criteria and 47 healthy controls. A combined noninvasive gastric and autonomic function test was performed: The electrogastrogram and electrocardiogram were recorded simultaneously in the fasting state and after a drink test. Symptoms after drinking were recorded using visual analog scale. Results: (1) Compared with HC, FD patients showed a decreased maximum tolerable volume (MTV) (PPPPPPPP=0.034, 0.021, 0.043, respectively). No significant associations were found in the other 2 subgroups. Conclusions: The combination of multiple tests can detect pathophysiological abnormities in FD patients. Overall, patients with overlap symptoms display more severe pathophysiologies.