Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 2, 2026

Bladder Smooth Muscle Strip Contractility as a Method to Evaluate Lower Urinary Tract Pharmacology
Published on: August 18, 2014
Resting and Squeeze Anal Pull-Through Assessments by Fecobionics Demonstrate Weak Anal Sphincters in Patients With
Giuliana Barron Del Solar1, Xiaomei Guo1, Danielle Long2
1California Medical Innovations Institute, San Diego, California, USA.
Background:
Many fecal incontinence (FI) patients have low anal sphincter pressure, which is thought to be a major pathophysiological mechanism. This is assessed either by stationary or pull-through manometry techniques. Fecobionics is a new device for comprehensive assessment of anorectal function.
Aim:
To evaluate anal pressure profiles during rest and squeeze pull-through maneuvers in FI patients and normal subjects (NS) using Fecobionics and to compare with current technology.
Methods:
Patients with FI (Rome IV criteria) and healthy controls were recruited. FI severity was assessed with FISI questionnaire. Anal pull-through maneuvers were performed using Fecobionics and anorectal manometry (ARM) during rest and maximum anal squeeze, and the pull-through pressures were measured and compared. Data were expressed as median and quartiles. Non-parametric statistical testing was done.
Results:
Forty-four FI patients and 20 NS participated. The FISI score was 0 (0-0) in the NS group and 28 (22-35) in the FI group. Resting pull-through pressure did not differ between FI patients (82.0 (56.0-145.5 cmH2O)) and NS (99.5 (64.8-138.5 cmH2O)), whereas the maximum squeeze pressure was lower in FI (124.5 (85.5-208.8 cmH2O)) than NS (169.5 (122.3-262.0 cmH2O)) (p < 0.02). Furthermore, the difference between maximum squeeze and resting pressure differed between groups (p < 0.01). ARM did not show differences between the groups at rest or maximum squeeze (p >>0.2). Strong association was found between the resting and contracted pull-through pressures (r = 0.74, p < 0.001). Similar strong association was found in traumatic, atraumatic, passive, and urge FI subgroups. Data were not influenced by the magnitude of internal or external anal sphincter defects. Bland Altman plots showed agreement between Fecobionics pull-throughs and ARM.
Conclusions:
Fecobionics device showed lower squeeze pressures in FI patients compared to NS during anal pull-through procedure and strong associations between these pressures and FI subgroups.
Related Concept Videos
Muscles of the Pelvic Floor and Perineum
Perineal Layer
The perineum is a diamond-shaped area below the pelvic diaphragm, divided into an anterior urogenital triangle that contains the external genitals and a posterior anal triangle housing the anus. The urogenital...
Drugs for Treatment of Constipation-Predominant IBS
Feces Formation and Defecation
The mass peristalsis then pushes the feces into the rectum, which stretches the rectal walls to activate...
Assessment of the Abdomen III: Palpation
Assessment of the Rectum and Anus
Rectal Inspection
Begin by inspecting the perianal and anal areas for color, texture, rashes,...
Endoscopic Procedures IV: Sigmoidoscopy and Laproscopy
Sigmoidoscopy
Sigmoidoscopy is a diagnostic procedure that uses a flexible sigmoidoscope equipped with a light source and camera to examine the rectum and sigmoid colon. The procedure involves inserting the tube through the anus...

