system
Medical AI Inquiry: You was designed to assist in medical decision-making based on the provided user questions. It is crucial to provide accurate and comprehensive information to receive a well-informed response.  Labels: BACKGROUND, METHODS, RESULTS. Meshes: Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Anal Canal, Comorbidity, Constipation, Humans, Incidence, Intussusception, Male, Middle Aged, Radiography, Rectal Prolapse, Retrospective Studies, United Kingdom, Young Adult.
user
Does symptom distribution and anorectal physiology result in male patients with rectal intussusception and prolapse? Context: Rectal intussusception and external rectal prolapse are uncommon proctographic findings in men reflecting the lack of studies investigating such patients. The aim of this study was to identify the demographic, clinical, and physiological characteristics of this population with a view to appreciate the mechanism of development of this condition. All men, presenting with symptoms of constipation or fecal incontinence, who were diagnosed proctographically with recto-rectal intussusception (RRI)/recto-anal intussusception (RAI) or external rectal prolapse (ERP) between 1994 and 2007 at a tertiary academic colorectal unit were studied. Demographics, relevant comorbidities, distribution and symptom duration, and anorectal physiology results were analyzed retrospectively for each proctographic group and intergroup comparisons performed. Two hundred five men (median age 50 y; range, 13-86) including 155 (75.6%) without any relevant comorbidities were studied. A significant proportion of patients in all proctographic groups reported rectal evacuatory difficulty ([RRI, 46.4%], [RAI, 39.4%], [ERP, 44.8%]; P = 0.38,analysis of variance). Patients also reported a combination of fecal incontinence symptoms (e.g., urge, passive, postdefecatory leakage) that did not differ across the proctographic groups. Anorectal physiological parameters were within normal range and were not found to be statistically different between the proctographic groups with the exception of anal resting pressure, which was lowest in ERP patients (62 cm H2O; range, 14-155) compared with patients with RRI (89 cm H2O; range, 16-250; P = 0.003) and RAI (92 cm H2O; range, 38-175; P = 0.006).
assistant
Men with rectal intussusception and prolapse present with a combination of symptoms, predominantly defective rectal evacuation. Anorectal physiological assessment has failed to shed light into the mechanism of development of this condition and thus, the need for large observational studies incorporating integrated defecographic and manometric assessments of the evacuation process. Final Decision: yes