Zara Asif1, Roni Tomashev2, Veronica Peterkin2, Qi Wei1, Jonia Alshiek2, Baumfeld Yael2, S Abbas Shobeiri3,4. 1. Department of Bioengineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA. 2. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, INOVA Women's Hospital, 3300 Gallows Road, Second-floor South tower, Falls Church, VA, 22042-3307, USA. 3. Department of Bioengineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA. Abbas.Shobeiri@inova.org. 4. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, INOVA Women's Hospital, 3300 Gallows Road, Second-floor South tower, Falls Church, VA, 22042-3307, USA. Abbas.Shobeiri@inova.org.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study aimed to compare the difference in levator ani muscle (LAM) volumes between 'normal' and those with sonographically visualized LAM defects. We hypothesized that the 'muscle damage' group would have a significantly lower muscle volume. METHODS: The study included patients who had undergone a 3D endovaginal ultrasound. The normal (NM) and damage (DM) muscle groups' architectural changes were evaluated based on anterior-posterior (AP), left-right (LR) diameter, and minimal levator hiatus (MLH) area. The puboanalis-puboperinealis (PA), puborectalis (PR), and pubococcygeus-iliococcygeus (PC) were manually segmented using 2.5 vs. 1.0 mm to find the optimal sequence and to compare the volumes between NM and DM groups. POPQs were compared between the NM and DM groups. RESULTS: The 1.0-mm segmentation volumes created superior volume analysis. Comparing NM to the DM group showed no significant difference in LAM volume. Respectively, the mean total LAM volumes were 17.27 cm3 (SD = 3.97) and 17.04 cm3 (SD = 4.32), p = 0.79. The mean MLH measurements for both groups respectively were 10.06 cm2 (SD = 2.93) and 12.18 cm2 (SD = 2.93), indicating a significant difference (p = 0.01). POPQ analysis demonstrated statistically significant differences at Ba and Bp parameters suggesting that the DM group had worse prolapse (p = 0.05, 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: While LAM volumes are similar, there is a significant difference in the physical architecture of the LAM and the POPQ parameters in muscle-damaged patients compared to the normal group.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study aimed to compare the difference in levator ani muscle (LAM) volumes between 'normal' and those with sonographically visualized LAM defects. We hypothesized that the 'muscle damage' group would have a significantly lower muscle volume. METHODS: The study included patients who had undergone a 3D endovaginal ultrasound. The normal (NM) and damage (DM) muscle groups' architectural changes were evaluated based on anterior-posterior (AP), left-right (LR) diameter, and minimal levator hiatus (MLH) area. The puboanalis-puboperinealis (PA), puborectalis (PR), and pubococcygeus-iliococcygeus (PC) were manually segmented using 2.5 vs. 1.0 mm to find the optimal sequence and to compare the volumes between NM and DM groups. POPQs were compared between the NM and DM groups. RESULTS: The 1.0-mm segmentation volumes created superior volume analysis. Comparing NM to the DM group showed no significant difference in LAM volume. Respectively, the mean total LAM volumes were 17.27 cm3 (SD = 3.97) and 17.04 cm3 (SD = 4.32), p = 0.79. The mean MLH measurements for both groups respectively were 10.06 cm2 (SD = 2.93) and 12.18 cm2 (SD = 2.93), indicating a significant difference (p = 0.01). POPQ analysis demonstrated statistically significant differences at Ba and Bp parameters suggesting that the DM group had worse prolapse (p = 0.05, 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: While LAM volumes are similar, there is a significant difference in the physical architecture of the LAM and the POPQ parameters in muscle-damaged patients compared to the normal group.
Authors: Giulio Aniello Santoro; Andrzej Paweł Wieczorek; S Abbas Shobeiri; Elizabeth R Mueller; Jacek Pilat; Aleksandra Stankiewicz; Giuseppe Battistella Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2010-08-11 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: N Sindhwani; D Barbosa; M Alessandrini; B Heyde; H P Dietz; J D'Hooge; J Deprest Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 7.299
Authors: Pouya Javadian; Dena O'Leary; Ghazaleh Rostaminia; Justin North; Jason Wagner; Lieschen H Quiroz; S Abbas Shobeiri Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2015-12-15 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Kim W M van Delft; Abdul H Sultan; Ranee Thakar; S Abbas Shobeiri; Kirsten B Kluivers Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-05-24 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Lieschen H Quiroz; Stephanie D Pickett; Jennifer D Peck; Ghazaleh Rostaminia; Daniel E Stone; S Abbas Shobeiri Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2017 Mar/Apr Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: G Rostaminia; J Manonai; E Leclaire; F Omoumi; M Marchiorlatti; L H Quiroz; S A Shobeiri Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Sarah Friedman; Joan L Blomquist; Joann M Nugent; Kelly C McDermott; Alvaro Muñoz; Victoria L Handa Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Ghazaleh Rostaminia; Dena White; Aparna Hegde; Lieschen H Quiroz; G Willy Davila; S Abbas Shobeiri Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 7.661