Validation of an automated software (Smartpelvic™) in assessing hiatal area from three dimensional transperineal pelvic volumes of pregnant women: comparison with manual analysis
Author:
Resta Serena1, De Vito Marika1, Patelli Chiara2, Lu Jia Li Angela1, Gabrielli Gianluca1, Chiodo Erika1, Mappa Ilenia1, Rizzo Giuseppe1ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology , Università di Roma Tor Vergata , Rome , Italy 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology , Università di Verona , Verona Italy
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the agreement between a manual and an automatic technique in assessing levator hiatus area (LHA) during pregnancy from three-dimensional (3D) pelvic floor volumes obtained by trans-perineal ultrasound (TPUS).
Methods
3D volumes were acquired during rest, maximum pelvic floor contraction and Valsalva maneuver from 66 pregnant women. Manual selection of LHA and automatic software (Smart Pelvic™) were applied on TPUS volume starting from a C-plane view. To evaluate intra- and inter-observer variability measurements of LHA were performed twice by the same operator and once by a second sonographer. Reference hiatal contours obtained manually by the first operator were compared with the automated ones. Reproducibility was evaluated by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots.
Results
LHA measurement, using automatic software, achieved excellent intra-observer and inter-observer reproducibility in pregnant women both at rest and after dynamic analysis (ICC>0.9). Further, an excellent agreement resulted between manual selection of the LHA and automatic imaging (ICC>0.9). The average time taken to obtain LHA manually was significantly longer when compared to the automatic analysis (p≤0.0001).
Conclusions
Smart pelvic software resulted from a reliable method for automatically measuring the LHA, showing high reproducibility and accuracy.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Obstetrics and Gynecology,Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
Reference31 articles.
1. Nygaard, I, Barber, MD, Burgio, KL, Kenton, K, Meikle, S, Schaffer, J, et al.. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA 2008;300:1311–16. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.300.11.1311. 2. Barlow, DH, Samsioe, G, van Geelen, JM. A study of European womens’ experience of the problems of urogenital ageing and its management. Maturitas 1997;27:239–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-5122(97)00047-9. 3. Rortveit, G, Brown, JS, Thom, DH, Van Den Eeden, SK, Creasman, JM, Subak, LL. Symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: prevalence and risk factors in a population-based, racially diverse cohort. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:1396–403. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000263469.68106.90. 4. Subak, LL, Waetjen, LE, van den Eeden, S, Thom, DH, Vittinghoff, E, Brown, JS. Cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:646–51. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006250-200110000-00021. 5. Sung, VW, Washington, B, Raker, CA. Costs of ambulatory care related to female pelvic floor disorders in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;202:483.e1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2010.01.015.
|
|