Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

´ëº¯ ½Ç±ÝÁõ ȯÀÚ¿¡¼­ ¹èº¯Á¶¿µ¼ú ¼Ò°ß Defecographic Findings in Patients with Fecal Incontinence

´ëÇÑ´ëÀåÇ×¹®ÇÐȸÁö 1997³â 13±Ç 4È£ p.591 ~ 595
¹ÚÈ¿Áø, Á¤ÁرÙ, ÁöÈÆ, ½ÅÀçÈ£, ÀÌ»óÀÎ, ¹ÚÀμ­,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¹ÚÈ¿Áø ( Park Hyo-Jin ) 
¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ³»°úÇб³½Ç

Á¤Áر٠( Jung Jun-Geon ) 
¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ³»°úÇб³½Ç
ÁöÈÆ ( Ji Hoon ) 
¾ÆÁÖ´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ¹æ»ç¼±°úÇб³½Ç
½ÅÀçÈ£ ( Shin Jae-Ho ) 
¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ³»°úÇб³½Ç
ÀÌ»óÀΠ( Lee Sang-In ) 
¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ³»°úÇб³½Ç
¹ÚÀμ­ ( Park In-Suh ) 
¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ³»°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract


We performed this study to investigate defecographic findings in patients with fecal incontinence and to compare these findings with age-matched asymptomatic controls. Twenty patients with fecal incontinence and 20 asymptomatic subjects were included. Videodefecography and pelvic electrophysiologic test were performed. There were no significant differences on the presence of rectal wall changes such as rectocele, mucosal prolapse, or incomplete evacuation, but intussusception was more common in patients group. The anorectal angle were 112.8¡¾16.2¡Æ, 93.0¡¾15.0¡Æ, 118.8¡¾16.3¡Æ at resting, squeezing, and straining, respectively in controls, whereas 121.5¡¾20.8¡Æ, 110.8¡¾22.2¡Æ, 132.0¡¾21.1¡Æ, respectively in patients group. There were significant differences of anorectal angle at squeezing and straining in patients group compared with controls(p< 0.05). Perineal descent was significantly decreased at squeezing in patients group
compared with controls(p<0.05). Anal canal width was signi(icantly widened in patients group compared with controls(p<0.05). There were no differences in various defecographic parameters depending on the presence of pudendal neuropathy. In conclusion, defecographic findings in fecal incontinence showed more obtuse anorectal angle, poorer perineal descent at squeezing, and widening of anal canal.

Å°¿öµå

Defecography;Fecal Incontinence

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed
KAMS