1995
DOI: 10.1007/bf01957362
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Defaecation disorders in children, colonic transit time versus the Barr-score

Abstract: It is still unclear how to evaluate the existence of faecal retention or impaction in children with defaecation disorders. To objectivate the presence and degree of constipation we measured segmental and total colonic transit times (CTT) using radio-opaque markers in 211 constipated children. On clinical grounds, patients (median age 8 years (5-14 years)) could be divided into three groups; constipation, isolated encopresis/soiling and recurrent abdominal pain. Barr-scores, a method for assessment of stool ret… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
48
0
6

Year Published

1996
1996
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 77 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
4
48
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Bijos et al calculated a recto-pelvic ratio by dividing the transverse diameter of the rectal ampulla by the transverse diameter of the pelvis. 31 In children with functional constipation, the mean recto pelvic ratio was 0.22 AE 0.05, compared with 0.15 AE 0.04 in healthy control subjects. The difference was statistically significant in all age groups.…”
Section: Rectal Ultrasound Scanningmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Bijos et al calculated a recto-pelvic ratio by dividing the transverse diameter of the rectal ampulla by the transverse diameter of the pelvis. 31 In children with functional constipation, the mean recto pelvic ratio was 0.22 AE 0.05, compared with 0.15 AE 0.04 in healthy control subjects. The difference was statistically significant in all age groups.…”
Section: Rectal Ultrasound Scanningmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…No diagnostic accuracy study (n=8;CTT;X-ray) [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] No children included (n=1;ultrasound) 17 No control group (n=1;CTT) 18 No reference standard defined (n=2;ultrasound;X-ray) 19,20 Patients with severe comorbidity (n=1;CTT) 21 Systematic review, no QUADAS (n=1;CTT) 22 Included papers (n=10) Systematic review including 6 studies on abdominal radiography (n=1) 23 Diagnostic value of abdominal radiography (n=2) 24,25 Diagnostic value of CTT (n=3) [25][26][27] Diagnostic value of Ultrasonography (n=4) [25][26][27][28][29][30][31] Figure. …”
Section: Appendixmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…any other criteria of constipation [3,4,14]. Children with organic causes of faecal incontinence such as, muscle disorders, spina bi®da, anal atresia and Hirschsprung disease or mental retardation were excluded.…”
Section: Solitary Encopresis Was De®ned As Faecal Incontinence Withoutmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1,3 It also involves constitutional factors, a low-fiber diet, and motility disorders of the digestive tract characterized by an increase in intestinal transit time, especially in the colon. 1,4,5 Hypothetically, distension of the colonic wall may compromise its contraction and propulsive force, or even be accompanied by the absence of high-amplitude peristaltic colonic waves, which propel stool toward the rectum. This situation has been described in children with severe refractory constipation, in whom colonic manometry did not reveal high-amplitude peristaltic colonic waves, even after stimulation of a meal (gastrocolic reflex) or administration of a peristaltic stimulant.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%