Literature DB >> 30972442

Comparison of measurement systems for posterior vaginal wall prolapse on magnetic resonance imaging.

Bing Xie1,2, Luyun Chen3, Zhuowei Xue4, Emily M English2, Dee E Fenner2, Kara Gaetke-Udager5, Giselle E Kolenic2, James A Ashton-Miller3,6, John O DeLancey7.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: A wide variety of reference lines and landmarks have been used in imaging studies to diagnose and quantify posterior vaginal wall prolapse without consensus. We sought to determine which is the best system to (1) identify posterior vaginal wall prolapse and its appropriate cutoff values and (2) assess the prolapse size.
METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of sagittal maximal Valsalva dynamic MRI scans from 52 posterior-predominant prolapse cases and 60 comparable controls from ongoing research. All eight existing measurement lines and a new parameter, the exposed vaginal length, were measured. Expert opinions were used to score the prolapse sizes. Simple linear regressions, effect sizes, area under the curve, and classification and regression tree analyses were used to compare these reference systems and determine cutoff values. Linear and ordinal logistic regressions were used to assess the effectiveness of the prolapse size.
RESULTS: Among existing parameters, "the perineal line-internal pubis," a reference line from the inside of the pubic symphysis to the front tip of the perineal body (cutoff value 0.9 cm), had the largest effect size (1.61), showed the highest sensitivity and specificity to discriminate prolapse with area under the curve (0.91), and explained the most variation (68%) in prolapse size scores. The exposed vaginal length (cutoff value 2.9) outperformed all the existing lines, with the largest effect size (2.09), area under the curve (0.95), and R-squared value (0.77).
CONCLUSIONS: The exposed vaginal length performs slightly better than the best of the existing systems, for both diagnosing and quantifying posterior prolapse size. Performance characteristics and evidence-based cutoffs might be useful in clinical practice.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cutoffs; Dynamic MRI; Exposed vaginal length; Magnetic resonance imaging; Posterior vaginal wall prolapse; Reference line

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30972442      PMCID: PMC6642838          DOI: 10.1007/s00192-019-03939-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  23 in total

1.  Structural position of the posterior vagina and pelvic floor in women with and without posterior vaginal prolapse.

Authors:  Christina Lewicky-Gaupp; Aisha Yousuf; Kindra A Larson; Dee E Fenner; John O L Delancey
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Procedures for pelvic organ prolapse in the United States, 1979-1997.

Authors:  Sarah Hamilton Boyles; Anne M Weber; Leslie Meyn
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Triphasic MRI of pelvic organ descent: sources of measurement error.

Authors:  Geert L Morren; Adrian G Balasingam; J Elisabeth Wells; Anne M Hunter; Richard H Coates; Richard E Perry
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.528

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging-based three-dimensional model of anterior vaginal wall position at rest and maximal strain in women with and without prolapse.

Authors:  Kindra A Larson; Yvonne Hsu; Luyun Chen; James A Ashton-Miller; John O L DeLancey
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-05-07       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  How large does a rectocele have to be to cause symptoms? A 3D/4D ultrasound study.

Authors:  H P Dietz; X Zhang; K L Shek; Rojas R Guzman
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-05-06       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  The anatomic and functional variability of rectoceles in women.

Authors:  K Kenton; S Shott; L Brubaker
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  1999

7.  Evacuation proctography: an investigation of rectal expulsion in 20 subjects without defecatory disturbance.

Authors:  C I Bartram; G K Turnbull; J E Lennard-Jones
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1988

8.  Posterior vaginal wall prolapse does not correlate with fecal symptoms or objective measures of anorectal function.

Authors:  Giovanna Marques da Silva; Brooke Gurland; Ambereen Sleemi; Gil Levy
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Clinical examination and dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in vaginal vault prolapse.

Authors:  Eduard Cortes; Wendy M N Reid; Kavita Singh; Leslie Berger
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to quantify pelvic organ prolapse: reliability of assessment and correlation with clinical findings and pelvic floor symptoms.

Authors:  Mariëlle M E Lakeman; F M Zijta; J Peringa; A J Nederveen; J Stoker; J P W R Roovers
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-04-25       Impact factor: 2.894

View more
  2 in total

1.  Structural failure sites in posterior vaginal wall prolapse: stress 3D MRI-based analysis.

Authors:  Luyun Chen; Bing Xie; Dee E Fenner; Mary E Duarte Thibault; James A Ashton-Miller; John O DeLancey
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 1.932

2.  Ultrasound imaging of the perineal body: a useful clinical tool.

Authors:  Victoria Asfour; Giuseppe Alessandro Digesu; Ruwan Fernando; Vik Khullar
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 2.894

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.