Author:
Hölscher Miriam,Gräf Charlotte,Stickelmann Anna-Lena,Stickeler Elmar,Najjari Laila
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The aim of this study was to determine the reproducibility and tolerance of perianal ultrasound (PAUS) and detect differences in sphincter muscles between various measuring positions and different maneuvers. PAUS was compared to digital-rectal examination (DRE) to see if sphincter contraction is visible and gradable in ultrasound volumes.
Methods
Fifty women underwent a medical history, DRU and PAUS by two uro-gynecologists in a prospective trial. PAUS volumes were measured via different parameters in different maneuvers. Examiners’ DRE impressions of sphincter tone were scaled with the DRESS-score. All patients completed a questionnaire.
Results
Thirty-five patients with complete PAUS and DRE were included in the study. Fifteen patients were excluded due to poor ultrasound volume quality or sphincter defects. Comparison of sphincter muscle thickness at different positions in PAUS showed significant differences between 6 and 12 o’clock positions (12 > 6 o’clock) and diameters (horizontal > vertical). No difference was found between the examiners. In comparison of rest and contraction only the vertical diameter changed. There was a negative but not significant correlation between PAUS measurements and DRESS-scores. Twenty-six patients completed the questionnaire that revealed women preferred PAUS over DRE.
Conclusion
PAUS is a reproducible and good tool to visualize the anal canal. It is comfortable for patients and easily handled by examiners. Sphincter muscle contraction is iso-volumetric. Vertical diameter changes during contraction leading the anal canal change its shape to oval due to external influence. PAUS is the ideal additional tool to visualize relevant structures that are palpable on DRE.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Obstetrics and Gynaecology,Reproductive Medicine,General Medicine
Reference30 articles.
1. Rao SS. Pathophysiology of adult fecal incontinence. Gastroenterology. 2004;126(1 Suppl 1):S14-22.
2. Jorge JM, Wexner SD. Etiology and management of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 1993;36(1):77–97.
3. Aitola P, Lehto K, Fonsell R, Huhtala H. Prevalence of faecal incontinence in adults aged 30 years or more in general population. Colorectal Dis Off J Assoc Coloproctol G B Irel. 2010;12(7):687–91.
4. Melville JL, Fan MY, Newton K, Fenner D. Fecal incontinence in US women: a population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(6):2071–6.
5. MacLennan AH, Taylor AW, Wilson DH, Wilson D. The prevalence of pelvic floor disorders and their relationship to gender, age, parity and mode of delivery. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2000;107(12):1460–70.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献