Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2023
Evaluation of levator ani muscle elasticity after vaginal delivery and cesarean section using shear wave elastography.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Okada Yoshiyuki, Nakagawa Chie, Shigeta Miwa, Nomura Yukiko, Inoue Eisuke, Ichizuka Kiyotake, Yoshimura Yasukuni
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The risk of pelvic floor muscle injury is commonly considered to be higher in vaginal than in cesarean delivery. This study aimed to compare levator ani muscle (LAM) elasticity after vaginal and cesarean delivery using shear wave elastography (SWE).
METHODS: Postpartum women who underwent a single SWE evaluation 1 month after their first delivery were divided into vaginal and cesarean delivery groups. The elastic moduli of both sides of the LAM were measured in a horizontal section and compared between the groups. In addition, a subgroup analysis was performed to compare LAM elasticity according to the delivery method within the vaginal delivery group-normal vaginal delivery, episiotomy, and operative vaginal delivery.
RESULTS: Sixty-two women were included (vaginal delivery, n = 47; elective cesarean section, n = 15). Multiple regression analysis revealed that the LAM elastic modulus was significantly lower in the vaginal delivery group than in the cesarean delivery group (right LAM: 44.2 vs. 72.7 kPa, p = 0.0036; left LAM 40.4 vs. 82.7 kPa, p < 0.0001). In the subgroup analysis, the right LAM elastic modulus was significantly lower in the operative vaginal delivery subgroup than in the normal vaginal delivery subgroup (p = 0.0131). However, there was no significant difference in the left LAM elastic modulus between the three subgroups.
CONCLUSION: LAM elasticity was significantly lower after vaginal delivery than after cesarean delivery. Furthermore, the elasticity of the right LAM was lower after operative vaginal delivery than after normal vaginal delivery. SWE has the potential to provide an objective quantitative assessment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle recovery.
METHODS: Postpartum women who underwent a single SWE evaluation 1 month after their first delivery were divided into vaginal and cesarean delivery groups. The elastic moduli of both sides of the LAM were measured in a horizontal section and compared between the groups. In addition, a subgroup analysis was performed to compare LAM elasticity according to the delivery method within the vaginal delivery group-normal vaginal delivery, episiotomy, and operative vaginal delivery.
RESULTS: Sixty-two women were included (vaginal delivery, n = 47; elective cesarean section, n = 15). Multiple regression analysis revealed that the LAM elastic modulus was significantly lower in the vaginal delivery group than in the cesarean delivery group (right LAM: 44.2 vs. 72.7 kPa, p = 0.0036; left LAM 40.4 vs. 82.7 kPa, p < 0.0001). In the subgroup analysis, the right LAM elastic modulus was significantly lower in the operative vaginal delivery subgroup than in the normal vaginal delivery subgroup (p = 0.0131). However, there was no significant difference in the left LAM elastic modulus between the three subgroups.
CONCLUSION: LAM elasticity was significantly lower after vaginal delivery than after cesarean delivery. Furthermore, the elasticity of the right LAM was lower after operative vaginal delivery than after normal vaginal delivery. SWE has the potential to provide an objective quantitative assessment of postpartum pelvic floor muscle recovery.