Assessment of posterior compartment prolapse; a comparison of evacuation proctography and 3D transperineal ultrasound

Comparison of 3-Dimensional Pelvic Floor Ultrasonography and Defecography for Assessment of Posterior Pelvic Floor Disorders

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of 3-dimensional (3D) pelvic floor ultrasonography and compare it with defecography in assessment of posterior pelvic disorders.

METHODS

Eligible patients were consecutive women undergoing 3D pelvic floor ultrasonography at one hospital between August 2017 and February 2019. All 3D pelvic floor ultrasonography was performed by one examiner. A total of 167 patients with suspected posterior pelvic disorder was retrospectively enrolled in the study. The patients were divided into 3 groups according to the main symptoms.

RESULTS

There were 82 rectoceles on defecography (55 barium trapping) and 84 on 3D pelvic floor ultrasonography. Each modality identified 6 enteroceles. There were 43 patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia on defecography and 41 on ultrasonography. There were 84 patients with intussusception on defecography and 41 on 3D pelvic floor ultrasonography. Agreement of the 2 diagnostic tests was confirmed using Cohen's kappa value. Rectocele (kappa, 0.784) and enterocele (kappa, 0.654) both indicated good agreement between defecography and 3D pelvic floor ultrasonography. In addition, pelvic floor dyssynergia (kappa, 0.406) showed moderate agreement, while internal intussusception (kappa, 0.296) had fair agreement.

CONCLUSION

This study showed good agreement for detection of posterior pelvic disorders between defecography and 3D pelvic floor ultrasonography.

Digital rectal examination in the evaluation of rectovaginal septal defects

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

The objective was to evaluate the diagnostic potential of digital rectal examination in the identification of a true rectocele.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study utilising 187 archived data sets of women presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms and/or pelvic organ prolapse between August 2012 and November 2013. Evaluation included a standardised interview, ICS-POPQ, rectal examination and 4D translabial ultrasound. The main outcome measure was the diagnosis of rectocele by digital rectal palpation on Valsalva manoeuvre. This diagnosis correlated with the sonographic diagnosis of rectocele to determine agreement between digital examination and ultrasound findings.

RESULTS

Complete data sets were available for 180 participants. On imaging, the mean position of the rectal ampulla was 11.07 (-36.3 to 44.3) mm below the symphysis pubis; 42.8% (77) had a rectocele of a depth of ≥10 mm. On palpation, a rectocele was detected in 60 women (33%). Agreement between palpation and imaging was observed in 77%; the kappa was 0.52 (CI 0.39-0.65). On receiver operator characteristic analysis, the area under the curve was 0.854 for the relationship between rectocele pocket depth and the detection of rectocele on palpation.

CONCLUSION

Moderate agreement was found between digital rectal examination for rectocele and translabial ultrasound findings of a "true rectocele". Digital rectal examination may be used to identify these defects in clinical practice. Extending the clinical examination of prolapse to include rectal examination to palpate defects in the rectovaginal septum may reduce the need for defecatory proctograms for the assessment of obstructive defecation and may help triage patients in the management of posterior compartment prolapse.

Clinical relevance of transperineal ultrasound compared with evacuation proctography for the evaluation of patients with obstructed defaecation

AIM

Dynamic evacuation proctography (DEP) is still considered the gold standard diagnostic procedure for posterior compartment pelvic disorders. The study aimed to assess the value of dynamic transperineal ultrasound (DTPU) compared with DEP in patients with obstructed defaecation syndrome (ODS).

METHOD

In a prospective observational study, 54 consecutive female patients referred with symptoms of ODS between January and June 2009 were studied by clinical evaluation (including Wexner score), perineal ultrasound and defaecography. The tests were analysed by two experienced investigators unaware of the opinion of the other.

RESULTS

DEP revealed a rectocoele in 35 (64%), intussusception in 27 (50%) and enterocoele in 10 (18.5%) patients. DTPU revealed a rectocoele in 32 (59%), intussusception in 23 (42%) and enterocoele in 11 (20%) patients. The degree of agreement of the two techniques calculated using the Cohen kappa method was 0.69 for rectocoele, 0.74 for intussusception and 0.86 for enterocoele. In patients with grade 2-3 rectocoele, the agreement was 0.88. There was no significant difference between the two techniques in the measurement of the anorectal angle or in the detection of dyssynergic contraction of the puborectalis. DTPU was better at identifying multiple diagnoses and associated pelvic floor alterations.

CONCLUSION

The degree of concordance between the two techniques is good. DTPU is accurate for asymptomatic patients with ODS and can be considered an alternative to DEP in the assessment of such patients.