4 Comparing anorectal function tests 117 28. Noelting J, Ratuapli SK, Bharucha AE, Harvey DM, Harvey DM, Ravi K, Ravi K, Zinsmeister AR. Normal values for high-resolution anorectal manometry in healthy women: effects of age and significance of rectoanal gradient. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2021;107(10):1530-6. doi:10.1038/ajg.2012.221. 29. Lee BE, Kim GH. How to perform and interpret balloon expulsion test. Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility. 2014;20(3):407-409. doi:10.5056/jnm14068. 30. Chiarioni G, Kim SM, Vantini I, Whitehead WE. Validation of the Balloon Evacuation Test: Reproducibility and Agreement With Findings From Anorectal Manometry and Electromyography. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2014;12(12):2049-54. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2014.03.013. 31. Gosselaar C, Kranse R, Roobol MJ, Roemeling S, Schröder FH. The interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomized trial for the screening of prostate cancer. Prostate. 2008;68(9):985-993. doi:10.1002/pros.20759. 32. Pereira-Azevedo N, Braga I, Verbeek JFM, et al. Prospective evaluation on the effect of interobserver variability of digital rectal examination on the performance of the Rotterdam Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator. International Journal of Urology. 2017;24(12):826-832. doi:10.1111/iju.13442. 33. Slieker-ten Hove MCP, Pool-Goudzwaard AL, Eijkemans MJC, Steegers-Theunissen RPM, Burger CW, Vierhout ME. Face validity and reliability of the first digital assessment scheme of pelvic floor muscle function conform the new standardized terminology of the international continence society. Neurourology and Urodynamics. 2009;28(4):295-300. doi:10.1002/nau.20659. 34. Orkin BA, Sinykin SB, Lloyd PC. The digital rectal examination scoring system (DRESS). Diseases of the Colon and Rectum. 2010;53(12):1656-1660. doi:10.1007/ DCR.0b013e3181f23c85. 35. Soh JS, Lee HJ, Jung KW, et al. The diagnostic value of a digital rectal examination compared with high-resolution anorectal manometry in patients with chronic constipation and fecal incontinence. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2015;110(8):1197-204. doi:10.1038/ajg.2015.153. 36. Felt-Bersma RJF, Klinkenberg-Knol EC, Meuwissen SGM. Anorectal function investigations in incontinent and continent patients - Differences and discriminatory value. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. 1990;33(6):485-6479-85. doi:10.1007/BF02052142. 37. Pinto RA, Corrêa Neto IJF, Nahas SC, Froehner Junior I, Soares DFM, Cecconello I. Is the Physician Expertise in Digital Rectal Examination of Value in Detecting Anal Tone in Comparison To Anorectal Manometry? Arquivos de gastroenterologia. 2019;56(1):79-83. doi:10.1590/S0004-2803.201900000-04. 38. Buch E, Alós R, Solana A, Roig JV, Fernández C, Díaz F. Can digital examination substitute anorectal manometry for the evaluation of anal canal pressures? Revista Espanola de Enfermedades Digestivas. 1998;90(2):85-93. 39. Hallan RI, Marzouk DEMM, Waldron DJ, Womack NR, Williams NS. Comparison of digital and manometric assessment of anal sphincter function. British Journal of Surgery. 1989;76(9):973-5. doi:10.1002/bjs.1800760934. 40. Otto SD, Clewing JM, Gröne J, Buhr HJ, Kroesen AJ. Repeatability of anorectal manometry in healthy volunteers and patients. Journal of Surgical Research. 2013;185(2):85-92. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2013.06.008.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw