Literature DB >> 15026922

Anal ultrasound and endosonographic measurement of perineal body thickness: a new evaluation for fecal incontinence in females.

M Oberwalder1, K Thaler, M K Baig, A Dinnewitzer, J Efron, E G Weiss, A M Vernava, J J Nogueras, S D Wexner.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Perineal body thickness (PBT) is measured by endoanal ultrasonography. The literature has shown that women with obstetric trauma to the anal sphincter have decreased PBT, and a measurement of 10 mm or less has been proposed as abnormal. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the proposed definitions of normal to pathologic findings in patients with fecal incontinence (FI) and to correlate PBT with anorectal physiologic findings.
METHODS: All female patients who had endoanal ultrasonography and PBT measurement for evaluation of FI were assessed and divided into three groups on the basis of PBT: 10 mm or less, 10 to 12 mm, more than 12 mm. The degree of FI (0 = complete continence; 20 = complete incontinence) was correlated with PBT.
RESULTS: For this study, 83 female patients with a mean age of 59.7 years (range, 30-88 years) had endoanal ultrasonography and PBT measurement. Sphincter defects were suggested by endoanal ultrasonography in 77% of the patients in the three groups as follows: 57 (97%) of 59 patients, 4 (36%) of 11 patients, and 3 (23%) of 13 patients. The mean external sphincter defect angle was 110 degrees (range, 45-170 degrees ), and the mean FI score was 13.8. For 89% of the patients there was a history of vaginal delivery. As reported, 35% had undergone one or more prior perineal surgeries, 27% had both, and 4% denied having had either. A significant correlation between sphincter defect and PBT (p < 0.001) was noted. External sphincter defect angles were negatively correlated with PBT (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: A PBT of 10 mm or less is considered abnormal, whereas a PBT of 10 mm to 12 mm is associated with sphincter defect in one-third of patients with FI. Those with a PBT of 12 mm or more are unlikely to harbor a defect unless they previously have undergone reconstructive perineal surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15026922     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-003-8138-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  8 in total

1.  Normal female anal sphincter: difficulties in interpretation explained.

Authors:  R C Bollard; A Gardiner; S Lindow; K Phillips; G S Duthie
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 4.585

2.  Intraobserver and interobserver agreement in anal endosonography.

Authors:  D M Gold; S Halligan; W A Kmiot; C I Bartram
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  Are sphincter defects the cause of anal incontinence after vaginal delivery? Results of a prospective study.

Authors:  L Abramowitz; I Sobhani; R Ganansia; A Vuagnat; J L Benifla; E Darai; P Madelenat; M Mignon
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.585

Review 4.  Etiology and management of fecal incontinence.

Authors:  J M Jorge; S D Wexner
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 4.585

5.  Accuracy and reliability of transanal ultrasound for anterior anal sphincter injury.

Authors:  S M Sentovich; W D Wong; G J Blatchford
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.585

6.  Anal endosonography for identifying external sphincter defects confirmed histologically.

Authors:  A H Sultan; M A Kamm; I C Talbot; R J Nicholls; C I Bartram
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  Anal sphincter defects. Correlation between endoanal ultrasound and surgery.

Authors:  K I Deen; D Kumar; J G Williams; J Olliff; M R Keighley
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Perineal body measurement improves evaluation of anterior sphincter lesions during endoanal ultrasonography.

Authors:  J P Zetterström; A Mellgren; R D Madoff; D G Kim; W D Wong
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 4.585

  8 in total
  5 in total

1.  Rectocele--does the size matter?

Authors:  Dan Carter; Marc Beer Gabel
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-02-04       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Anal canal anatomy showed by three-dimensional anorectal ultrasonography.

Authors:  F Sergio P Regadas; Sthela M Murad-Regadas; Doryane M R Lima; Flavio R Silva; Rosilma G L Barreto; Marcellus H L P Souza; F Sergio P Regadas Filho
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-04       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Transrectal ultrasound, manometry, and pudendal nerve terminal latency studies in the evaluation of sphincter injuries.

Authors:  Brooke Gurland; Tracy Hull
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2008-08

4.  An Evidence-Based Approach to the Evaluation, Diagnostic Assessment and Treatment of Fecal Incontinence in Women.

Authors:  Isuzu Meyer; Holly E Richter
Journal:  Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep       Date:  2014-09

5.  Interobserver agreement in perineal ultrasound measurement of the anovaginal distance: a methodological study.

Authors:  Sofia Pihl; Eva Uustal; Linda Hjertberg; Marie Blomberg
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-06-17       Impact factor: 2.894

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.