Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2022
Assessment of Perineal Scars on Translabial Pelvic Floor Ultrasound: A Pilot Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Housmans Susanne, Gillor Moshe, Shek Ka Lai, Dietz Hans Peter
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe a method for identifying and evaluating perineal scars using translabial pelvic floor ultrasound. We hypothesized that translabial ultrasound can identify a perineal scar and can differentiate episiotomies from spontaneous tears.
METHODS: This pilot study is a secondary analysis of data obtained in the Epi-No® trial. Perineal integrity was assessed using volumes acquired on pelvic floor muscle contraction according to the method previously described for anal sphincter imaging. A scar was diagnosed if a hypoechoic distortion in the perineum was noted. We postulated that an episiotomy would result in a linear scar visible on four dimensional translabial ultrasound whereas nonlinear scars were considered the result of spontaneous perineal tear of grade 2 or higher. The results of this assessment were compared with data retrieved from electronic medical records.
RESULTS: A scar was identified in 79/120 women (66%): 42 (35%) linear and 37 (31%) nonlinear. Sonographic and clinical diagnosis agreed on the presence or absence of perineal trauma in 66%. Agreement for the type of laceration was 50%.
CONCLUSION: In this retrospective pilot study, a blinded assessment of translabial ultrasound volume data showed agreement between clinical data and sonographic assessment of perineal integrity in 66% and of type of laceration in 50%. More work is needed to optimize the method in assessment of perineal scars to improve its performance before it can be used in clinical audit and research.
METHODS: This pilot study is a secondary analysis of data obtained in the Epi-No® trial. Perineal integrity was assessed using volumes acquired on pelvic floor muscle contraction according to the method previously described for anal sphincter imaging. A scar was diagnosed if a hypoechoic distortion in the perineum was noted. We postulated that an episiotomy would result in a linear scar visible on four dimensional translabial ultrasound whereas nonlinear scars were considered the result of spontaneous perineal tear of grade 2 or higher. The results of this assessment were compared with data retrieved from electronic medical records.
RESULTS: A scar was identified in 79/120 women (66%): 42 (35%) linear and 37 (31%) nonlinear. Sonographic and clinical diagnosis agreed on the presence or absence of perineal trauma in 66%. Agreement for the type of laceration was 50%.
CONCLUSION: In this retrospective pilot study, a blinded assessment of translabial ultrasound volume data showed agreement between clinical data and sonographic assessment of perineal integrity in 66% and of type of laceration in 50%. More work is needed to optimize the method in assessment of perineal scars to improve its performance before it can be used in clinical audit and research.