PURPOSE: Defecating proctography and more recently, magnetic resonance imaging have both been used for diagnosis in patients with pelvic floor dysfunction. This pilot study assessed the feasibility of dynamic transperineal ultrasound in a range of specific disorders affecting evacuation. METHODS: A protocol of sagittal and transverse transperineal imaging was established defining the infralevator viscera and soft tissues and the margins of the puborectalis muscle. Dynamic measurements were possible for the extent of puborectalis shortening, the anorectal angle, and the movement during straining of the anorectal junction. Calculations were made of the depth of demonstrated rectoceles, the posterior urethrovesical angle, and the movement of the urethrovesical junction. Diagnoses were confirmed by proctography (where appropriate) and clinical examination. RESULTS: Transverse images of the anal sphincter were comparable with those obtained using endoanal ultrasonography. Sagittal images permitted the measurement of puborectalis contraction and the anorectal angle comparable with those obtained during defecography. Cystoceles were able to be diagnosed during closure of the posterior urethrovesical angle and abnormal urethrovesical junction descent during straining. Rectoceles, peritoneoceles, enteroceles, and rectoanal intussusception were readily identified using dynamic transperineal ultrasonography. CONCLUSION: Dynamic transperineal ultrasound is a simple, noninvasive way to assess dynamically the interaction of the pelvic viscera and their relationship to the pelvic floor musculature in patients with evacuatory disorders and pelvic floor dysfunction.
PURPOSE: Defecating proctography and more recently, magnetic resonance imaging have both been used for diagnosis in patients with pelvic floor dysfunction. This pilot study assessed the feasibility of dynamic transperineal ultrasound in a range of specific disorders affecting evacuation. METHODS: A protocol of sagittal and transverse transperineal imaging was established defining the infralevator viscera and soft tissues and the margins of the puborectalis muscle. Dynamic measurements were possible for the extent of puborectalis shortening, the anorectal angle, and the movement during straining of the anorectal junction. Calculations were made of the depth of demonstrated rectoceles, the posterior urethrovesical angle, and the movement of the urethrovesical junction. Diagnoses were confirmed by proctography (where appropriate) and clinical examination. RESULTS: Transverse images of the anal sphincter were comparable with those obtained using endoanal ultrasonography. Sagittal images permitted the measurement of puborectalis contraction and the anorectal angle comparable with those obtained during defecography. Cystoceles were able to be diagnosed during closure of the posterior urethrovesical angle and abnormal urethrovesical junction descent during straining. Rectoceles, peritoneoceles, enteroceles, and rectoanal intussusception were readily identified using dynamic transperineal ultrasonography. CONCLUSION: Dynamic transperineal ultrasound is a simple, noninvasive way to assess dynamically the interaction of the pelvic viscera and their relationship to the pelvic floor musculature in patients with evacuatory disorders and pelvic floor dysfunction.