الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 223 |  |  |
| | | from | 223 | | |
Abstract
Introduction: Fecal incontinence in the pediatric age group is a devastating problem to both the patients and their families, representing approximately four percent of all childhood health problems. It cannot be assessed unless the child is at least four years of age or its developmental equivalent. This must be kept in mind when addressing the problem. When dealing with a fecally incontinent child, the examining doctor has to carry out a systematic assessment of the patient. Careful history from the parents and thorough physical examination can provide crucial input as regards the possible etiology behind the problem. Diagnostic investigations come after that. They include many options the most important being endoanal ultrasonography which remains the gold standard for assessment of the anatomy of the anal sphincters. Assessment of the physiological aspect of continence using anorectal manometry or nerve conduction tests can also provide some insight into the possible cause of the problem. Subjective assessment is flawed. For that reason the utilization of scoring systems is a must to objectify the issue and provide a comprehensible modality for the evaluation of any child with this problem before, during and after management. Aim of work: To review the prevalence of fecal incontinence in the pediatric age group. Conclusions: The main cause of fecal incontinence is in fact functional, being responsible for over 90% of cases. A systematic approach is a must when dealing with the problem involving a thorough history, examination and investigations. The endoanal ultrasound remains till now the gold standard for assessment of the anal sphincter anatomy and provides valuable information which may be used for both the diagnosis and management of the problem. Objective assessment using various scoring systems is a must when dealing with any case of fecal incontinence. It is important to keep in mind that no single scoring system has proven to be better at this job than any other and that selection of a scoring system usually comes down to individual experience and preference.