Li Tan1, Ka Lai Shek2,3, Ixora Kamisan Atan3, Rodrigo Guzman Rojas4,5, Hans Peter Dietz6. 1. Department of Ultrasound, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100730, China. 2. Liverpool Hospital, University of Western Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 3. Sydney Medical School Nepean, University of Sydney, Nepean Hospital, Penrith, NSW, 2750, Australia. 4. Departamento de Ginecología y Obstetricia, Facultad de Medicina, Clínica Alemana, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile. 5. Departamento de Ginecología y Obstetricia, Hospital Clínico de la Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile. 6. Sydney Medical School Nepean, University of Sydney, Nepean Hospital, Penrith, NSW, 2750, Australia. hpdietz@bigpond.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Translabial 3D/4D ultrasound is increasingly being used in the diagnostic evaluation of pelvic floor dysfunction. The result of the assessment is influenced by a number of confounders that are generally unrecognised. The aim of this study was to determine the short- to medium-term repeatability of translabial ultrasound measures of female pelvic organ support and pelvic floor anatomy. METHODS: This is a retrospective study analyzing archived ultrasound volume datasets of 106 patients with pelvic floor dysfunction. Every subject was assessed twice at an average interval of 73 days. Outcome measures including hiatal area on Valsalva, descent of the bladder neck, bladder, uterus and rectal ampulla, rectocele depth, diagnosis of true rectocele, and levator integrity (avulsion) were compared at the first and second appointments. RESULTS: All parameters of organ descent demonstrated good to excellent reliability (ICC 0.73-0.93) except for rectocele descent, which showed moderate reliability (ICC 0.44, CI 0.26-0.58). The most highly repeatable measure was hiatal area on Valsalva or "ballooning" (ICC 0.93, CI 0.90-0.95). For the diagnosis of levator avulsion and true rectocele, agreement was very high (kappa 0.91 for avulsion (CI 0.77-0.94) and kappa 0.73 (CI 0.56-0.84) for true rectocele). CONCLUSIONS: The short- to medium-term repeatability of translabial ultrasound measures of functional pelvic floor anatomy seems to be high. Hiatal area on Valsalva (ballooning) and diagnosis of levator avulsion were the most repeatable measures. The least repeatable measures related to the posterior compartment.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Translabial 3D/4D ultrasound is increasingly being used in the diagnostic evaluation of pelvic floor dysfunction. The result of the assessment is influenced by a number of confounders that are generally unrecognised. The aim of this study was to determine the short- to medium-term repeatability of translabial ultrasound measures of female pelvic organ support and pelvic floor anatomy. METHODS: This is a retrospective study analyzing archived ultrasound volume datasets of 106 patients with pelvic floor dysfunction. Every subject was assessed twice at an average interval of 73 days. Outcome measures including hiatal area on Valsalva, descent of the bladder neck, bladder, uterus and rectal ampulla, rectocele depth, diagnosis of true rectocele, and levator integrity (avulsion) were compared at the first and second appointments. RESULTS: All parameters of organ descent demonstrated good to excellent reliability (ICC 0.73-0.93) except for rectocele descent, which showed moderate reliability (ICC 0.44, CI 0.26-0.58). The most highly repeatable measure was hiatal area on Valsalva or "ballooning" (ICC 0.93, CI 0.90-0.95). For the diagnosis of levator avulsion and true rectocele, agreement was very high (kappa 0.91 for avulsion (CI 0.77-0.94) and kappa 0.73 (CI 0.56-0.84) for true rectocele). CONCLUSIONS: The short- to medium-term repeatability of translabial ultrasound measures of functional pelvic floor anatomy seems to be high. Hiatal area on Valsalva (ballooning) and diagnosis of levator avulsion were the most repeatable measures. The least repeatable measures related to the posterior compartment.
Authors: R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Rong R Zhuang; Yan F Song; Zi Q Chen; Ming Ma; Hui J Huang; Jin H Chen; Yun M Li Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2011-04-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Caroline W S Ferreira; Ixora K Atan; Andrew Martin; Ka Lai Shek; Hans Peter Dietz Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-03-11 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Camila C Araujo; Suelene S A Coelho; Natalia Martinho; Mariana Tanaka; Rodrigos M Jales; Cassia R T Juliato Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 2.894