Literature DB >> 20180035

New method for internal anal sphincter measurements: feasibility study.

A Sboarina1, A Minicozzi, C Cordiano.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this paper is to provide a method for measuring the internal anal sphincter on the basis of the quantitative analysis of three-dimensional endosonographic images. A software calculates a large set of measurements which are able to describe the three-dimensional shape of the muscle.
METHODS: A software provides four types of measurements: thickness, length, area and volume. The different magnitudes are estimated using the same reference system. The measurements obtained are modeled by functions that describe their spatial trend. The precision and reproducibility of the method was tested on a phantom before a study was performed on fifteen healthy patients. The measurements were carried out by two different operators. The inter-observer variability were assessed.
RESULTS: In the phantom measurements the mean errors and the standard deviation were: 0.05 +/- 0.1 mm for the thickness, 0.02 +/- 0.12 mm for the length, -4.43 +/- 2.4 mm(2) for the area, -20.69 +/- 20.83 mm(3) for the volume. The maximum absolute differences between the measurements carried out by the two operators was: 0.18 mm for the thickness (in the 95% of the case), 1.69 mm(2) for the area (in the 95% of the case), and 0.25 mm for the length, and 29.46 mm(3) for the volume. The human IAS assessments were evaluated on each segment. The mean of the all tissue measurements carried out were (mean +/- SD): 1.71 +/- 0.34 mm for the thickness, 33.24 +/- 6.10 mm for the length, 111.28 +/- 29.08 mm(2) for the area. The mean of the volume measurements of the entire tissue was: 4124 +/- 1160 mm(3). Inter-observer variability was observed only in the anterior proximal segment for the thickness measurements by Wilcoxon's signed rank test (P value = 0.048) and for the volume assessments by the limits of agreement method (-118 to 78 mm(3)). The mean percentage errors and the limit of agreement for the measurements of the entire tissue were: 0.27 and (-0.11 to 0.12 mm) for the thickness, -2.32 and (-3.88 to 2.33 mm) for the length, -0.05 and (-9.71 to 9.83 mm(2)) for the area, -1.89 and (-366 to 240 mm(3)) for the volume.
CONCLUSION: The assessments of accuracy and precision of the method result satisfactory for all four type of measurements. The reproducibility analysis confirms very good inter-observer agreement for the phantom measurements and for the most part of the IAS segments evaluations. Inter-observer variability was seen only for the thickness and volume measurements of the anterior-proximal segment. Our method provides a high number of measurements with good accuracy enabling a very detailed study of IAS morphology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20180035     DOI: 10.1007/s11548-010-0406-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg        ISSN: 1861-6410            Impact factor:   2.924


  15 in total

1.  An ultra-fast user-steered image segmentation paradigm: live wire on the fly.

Authors:  A X Falcão; J K Udupa; F K Miyazawa
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 10.048

2.  Measurement of anal sphincter muscles: endoanal US, endoanal MR imaging, or phased-array MR imaging? A study with healthy volunteers.

Authors:  R G Beets-Tan; G L Morren; G L Beets; A G Kessels; K el Naggar; E Lemaire; C G Baeten; J M van Engelshoven
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Female anal sphincter: age-related differences in asymptomatic volunteers with high-frequency endoanal US.

Authors:  Andrea Frudinger; Steve Halligan; Clive I Bartram; Ashley B Price; Michael A Kamm; Raimund Winter
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  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

5.  Endosonographic variations in the normal internal anal sphincter.

Authors:  S J Burnett; C I Bartram
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  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

7.  Three-dimensional endoanal ultrasound assessment of the anal sphincters: reproducibility.

Authors:  Ingrid P Olsen; Kåre Augensen; Tom Wilsgaard; Torvid Kiserud
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.636

8.  Endosonography of the anal sphincters: normal anatomy and comparison with manometry.

Authors:  A H Sultan; M A Kamm; C N Hudson; J R Nicholls; C I Bartram
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 2.350

9.  Primary degeneration of the internal anal sphincter as a cause of passive faecal incontinence.

Authors:  C J Vaizey; M A Kamm; C I Bartram
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1997-03-01       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Age effects on internal anal sphincter thickness and diameter in nulliparous females.

Authors:  Markus Huebner; Rebecca U Margulies; Dee E Fenner; James A Ashton-Miller; Khalil N Bitar; John O L DeLancey
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 4.585

View more
  1 in total

1.  Quantifying the extent of fistulotomy. How much sphincter can we safely divide? A three-dimensional endosonographic study.

Authors:  Marina Garcés-Albir; Stephanie Anne García-Botello; Pedro Esclapez-Valero; Angel Sanahuja-Santafé; Juan Raga-Vázquez; Alejandro Espi-Macías; Joaquín Ortega-Serrano
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 2.571

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.