Atrophy and defects detection of the external anal sphincter: Comparison between three-dimensional anal endosonography and endoanal magnetic resonance imaging

PURPOSE: Using endoanal magnetic resonance imaging, atrophy of the external anal sphincter can be established. This aspect has not been thoroughly investigated using three-dimensional anal endosonography. The purpose of this study was to compare prospectively three-dimensional anal endosonography to magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of atrophy and defects of the external anal sphincter in patients with fecal incontinence. In addition, we compared both techniques for anal sphincter thickness and length measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with fecal incontinence underwent three-dimensional anal endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging. Images of both endoluminal techniques were evaluated for atrophy and defects of the external anal sphincter. External anal sphincter atrophy scoring with three-dimensional anal endosonography depended on the distinction of the external anal sphincter and its reflectivity. External anal sphincter atrophy scoring with magnetic resonance imaging depended on the amount of muscle and the presence of fat replacement. Atrophy score was defined as none, moderate, and severe. A defect was defined at anal endosonography by a hypoechogenic zone and at magnetic resonance imaging as a discontinuity of the sphincteric ring and/or scar tissue. Differences between three-dimensional anal endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of external anal sphincter atrophy and defects were calculated. In addition, we compared external anal sphincter thickness and length measurements in three-dimensional anal endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were included ( median age, 58 years; range, 27 - 80; 15 women). Three-dimensional anal endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging did not significantly differ for the detection of external anal sphincter atrophy ( P = 0.25) and defects ( P = 0.38). Three-dimensional anal endosonography demonstrated atrophy in 16 patients, magnetic resonance imaging detected atrophy in 13 patients. Three-dimensional anal endosonography agreed with magnetic resonance imaging in 15 of 18 patients for the detection of external anal sphincter atrophy. Using the grading system, 8 of the 18 patients scored the same grade. Three-dimensional anal endosonography detected seven external anal sphincter defects and magnetic resonance imaging detected ten. Three-dimensional anal endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging agreed on the detection of external anal sphincter defects in 13 of 18 patients. Comparison between three-dimensional anal endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging for sphincter thickness and length measurements showed no statistically significant concordance and had no correlation with external anal sphincter atrophy. CONCLUSION: This is the first study that shows that three-dimensional anal endosonography can be used for detecting external anal sphincter atrophy. Both endoanal techniques are comparable in detecting atrophy and defects of the external anal sphincter, although there is a substantial difference in grading of external anal sphincter atrophy. Correlation between three-dimensional anal endosonography and magnetic resonance imaging for thickness and length measurements is poor. Inconsistency between the two methods needs to be evaluated further.