KEYWORDS: levator ani muscle; observer variation; pelvic organ prolapse; reproducibility of results; transperineal ultrasound; urinary incontinence CONTRIBUTION What are the novel findings of this work? Ultrasound is a reliable method for assessment of pelvic floor muscle contraction. The best results were for measurement of two-dimensional anteroposterior diameter of the levator hiatus, which had a moderate correlation with contraction assessed by palpation. We created an ultrasound contraction scale based on this measurement. What are the clinical implications of this work?Ultrasound can be used in a clinical setting to assess pelvic floor muscle contraction. The ultrasound contraction scale can be used as a tool for its assessment in the investigation of pelvic floor disorders and to evaluate the effect of conservative treatment of urinary incontinence or pelvic organ prolapse. ABSTRACTObjectives To determine intra-and interrater reliability and agreement for ultrasound measurements of pelvic floor muscle contraction and to assess the correlation between ultrasound and vaginal palpation. We also aimed to develop an ultrasound scale for assessment of pelvic floor muscle contraction.Methods This was a cross-sectional study of 195 women scheduled for stress urinary incontinence (n = 65) or prolapse (n = 65) surgery or who were primigravid (n = 65). Pelvic floor muscle contraction was assessed by vaginal palpation using the Modified Oxford Scale Results Intrarater ICC was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74-0.85) for proportional change in 2D levator hiatal AP diameter. Interrater ICC was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.72-0.89) for proportional change in 2D AP diameter, 0.80 (95% CI, for proportional change in 3D AP diameter and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.56-0.83) for proportional change in hiatal area. The prevalence of major levator injury was 22.6%. The strength of correlation (r S ) between ultrasound measurements and MOS score was 0.52 for 2D AP diameter, 0.62 for 3D AP diameter and 0.47 for hiatal area (P < 0.001 for all). On the ultrasound contraction scale, proportional change in 2D levator 126 Nyhus et al. hiatal AP diameter of < 1% corresponds to absent,[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] Conclusions Ultrasound seems to be an objective and reliable method for evaluation of pelvic floor muscle contraction. Proportional change in 2D levator hiatal AP diameter had the highest ICC and moderate correlation with MOS score assessed by vaginal palpation, and we constructed an ultrasound scale for assessment of pelvic floor muscle contraction based on this measure. Copyright
Objectives To evaluate the effect of preoperative pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) on pelvic floor muscle (PFM) contraction, symptoms of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and anatomical POP, 6 months after prolapse surgery, and to assess the overall changes in PFM contraction, POP symptoms and pelvic organ descent after surgery. Methods This was a randomized controlled trial of 159 women with symptomatic POP, Stage 2 or higher, scheduled for surgery. Participants were randomized to intervention including daily PFMT from inclusion to surgery (n = 81) or no intervention (controls; n = 78). Participants were examined at inclusion, on the day of surgery and 6 months after surgery. PFM contraction was assessed by: vaginal palpation using the Modified Oxford scale (MOS; 0–5); transperineal ultrasound, measuring the percentage change in levator hiatal anteroposterior diameter (APD) from rest to maximum PFM contraction; vaginal manometry; and surface electromyography (EMG). POP distance from the hymen in the compartment with the most dominant prolapse and organ descent in the anterior, central and posterior compartments were measured on maximum Valsalva maneuver. POP symptoms were assessed based on the sensation of vaginal bulge, which was graded using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0–100 mm). Linear mixed models were used to assess the effect of PFMT on outcome variables. Results Of the 159 women randomized, 151 completed the study, comprising 75 in the intervention and 76 in the control group. Mean waiting time for surgery was 22 ± 9.7 weeks and follow‐up was performed on average 28 ± 7.8 weeks after surgery. Postoperatively, no difference was found between the intervention and control groups with respect to PFM contraction assessed by vaginal palpation (MOS, 2.4 vs 2.2; P = 0.101), manometry (19.4 vs 19.7 cmH2O; P = 0.793), surface EMG (33.5 vs 33.1 mV; P = 0.815) and ultrasound (change in hiatal APD, 20.9% vs 19.3%; P = 0.211). Furthermore, no difference between groups was found for sensation of vaginal bulge (VAS, 7.4 vs 6.0 mm; P = 0.598), POP distance from the hymen in the dominant prolapse compartment (−1.8 vs −2.0 cm; P = 0.556) and sonographic descent of the bladder (0.5 vs 0.8 cm; P = 0.058), cervix (−1.3 vs −1.1 cm; P = 0.569) and rectal ampulla (0.3 vs 0.4 cm; P = 0.434). In all patients, compared with findings at initial examination, muscle contraction improved after surgery, as assessed by palpation (MOS, 2.1 vs 2.3; P = 0.007) and ultrasound (change in hiatal APD, 17.5% vs 20.1%; P = 0.001), and sensation of vaginal bulge was reduced (VAS, 57.6 vs 6.7 mm; P < 0.001). In addition, compared with the baseline examination, POP distance from the hymen in the dominant prolapse compartment (1.9 vs −1.9 cm; P < 0.001) and sonographic descent of the bladder (1.3 vs 0.6 cm; P < 0.001), cervix (0.0 vs −1.2 cm; P < 0.001) and rectal ampulla (0.9 vs 0.4 cm; P = 0.001) were reduced. Conclusions We found no effect of preoperative PFMT on PFM contraction, POP symptoms or anatomical prolapse after surgery. In all patie...
Levator macrotrauma was associated with weaker pelvic floor muscle contraction measured with palpation, perineometry and ultrasound. Women with pelvic organ prolapse had weaker contraction than women without prolapse. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.