Feasibility study of defecation studied with a wireless Fecobionics probe in normal subjects.
Feasibility study of defecation studied with a wireless Fecobionics probe in normal subjects.
复制标题
DOI：
10.14814/phy2.15338
复制
发表时间：
2022-06
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
已经开发了几种技术来评估肛门直肠功能，包括排便行为。我们使用了一种新的Fecobionics技术原型，一种多传感器模拟粪便，来可视化排便模式，并引入了新的指标来评估正常受试者的肛门直肠生理。对14例正常大便失禁和便秘患者进行问卷调查。10厘米长的Fecobionics设备提供轴向压力、方向、弯曲和形状的测量。Fecobionics袋被膨胀到直肠内急于排便的程度，然后受试者被要求撤离。评估生理排空参数。特别注意的是疏散期间的Fecobionics直肠压力梯度（F - RAPG）。以肛门直肠测压（ARM）和气囊排出试验（BET）作为参考。用户界面显示压力、方向、弯曲角度和形状之间的精细协调。压力测试结果显示，Fecobionics在11.5 s（7.5和18.8s）内被排出体外，这比主观报告的BET球囊排出时间要短。6名受试者在2分钟内未排出BET球囊。F‐RAPG为101 (79 ~ 131)cmH20，而ARM‐RAPG为- 28 (- 5 ~ - 47)cmH20 （p < 0.001）。两种RAPGs之间无相关性（r2 = 0.19）。仿生学在1名受试者（7%）和12名ARM受试者（86%）中显示矛盾的收缩。仿生学获得了新的生理数据。报告了排便模式和数据，可用于指导在正常受试者和排便障碍患者中进行更大规模的研究。根据其他研究，本Fecobionics研究质疑ARM - RAPG的价值。Fecobionics进一步发展成为一种无线设备，集成了轴向压力、方向、弯曲和形状变化的测量。正常受试者呈现压力-弯曲-形状集成模式。Fecobionics数据与BET排出时间和ARM - RAPG数据有显著差异。
Several technologies have been developed for assessing anorectal function including the act of defecation. We used a new prototype of the Fecobionics technology, a multi‐sensor simulated feces, to visualize defecatory patterns and introduced new metrics for anorectal physiology assessment in normal subjects. Fourteen subjects with normal fecal incontinence and constipation questionnaire scores were studied. The 10‐cm‐long Fecobionics device provided measurements of axial pressures, orientation, bending, and shape. The Fecobionics bag was distended to the urge‐to‐defecate level inside rectum where after the subjects were asked to evacuate. Physiological evacuation parameters were assessed. Special attention was paid to the Fecobionics rectoanal pressure gradient (F‐RAPG) during evacuation. Anorectal manometry (ARM) and balloon expulsion test (BET) were done as references. The user interface displayed the fine coordination between pressures, orientation, bending angle, and shape. The pressures showed that Fecobionics was expelled in 11.5 s (quartiles 7.5 and 18.8s), which was shorter than the subjectively reported expulsion time of the BET balloon. Six subjects did not expel the BET balloon within 2 min. The F‐RAPG was 101 (79–131) cmH2O, whereas the ARM‐RAPG was −28 (−5 to −47) cmH20 (p < 0.001). There was no association between the two RAPGs (r2 = 0.19). Fecobionics showed paradoxical contractions in one subject (7%) compared to 12 subjects with ARM (86%). Fecobionics obtained novel physiological data. Defecatory patterns and data are reported and can be used to guide larger‐scale studies in normal subjects and patients with defecatory disorders. In accordance with other studies, this Fecobionics study questions the value of the ARM‐RAPG. Fecobionics was further developed into a wireless device that integrated measurements of axial pressures, orientation, bending, and shape changes. Pressure‐bending‐shape integrated patterns are presented from normal subjects. Fecobionics data differed significantly from BET expulsion duration and ARM‐RAPG data.