Search

Objective: To determine if the addition of the assessment of levator ani muscle (LAM) avulsion to the measurement of the difference in the pubis‐uterine fundus distance between rest and with the Valsalva maneuver could increase the diagnostic capacity of ultrasound for uterine prolapse (UP). Methods: This multicenter, observational and prospective study included 145 patients. Ultrasound assessment was performed, establishing the diagnosis of UP as a difference between the pubic‐uterine fundus distance at rest and during the Valsalva maneuver ≥15 mm (standard technique), while LAM avulsion was defined as an abnormal LAM insertion in three central slices using multislice ultrasound. A binary multivariate logistic regression model was made using nonautomated methods to predict surgical UP (general population, premenopausal, and postmenopausal patients), including the difference between the pubis‐uterine fundus distance at rest and with the Valsalva maneuver as well as LAM avulsion. Results: A total of 143 patients completed the study. The addition of LAM avulsion criteria to the standard dynamic distance‐based protocol for the diagnosis of UP resulted in a higher sensitivity for the general population (79.7 vs 68.1%) as well as for premenopausal (89.3 vs 79.9%) and postmenopausal patients (76 vs 66.1%). In contrast, the standard technique showed a higher specificity than the model based on the standard technique associated with LAM avulsion for the general population (89.2 vs 74.3%) and premenopausal women (91.7 vs 63.2%). For postmenopausal patients, the model based on the standard technique associated with LAM avulsion had a higher sensitivity (76 vs 66.1%) and specificity (91.7 vs 86.8%) than the ultrasound diagnosis of UP. Conclusion: The implementation of the assessment of LAM avulsion in the ultrasound diagnosis of UP is useful in postmenopausal patients, increasing sensitivity and specificity relative to the ultrasound assessment based only on the difference between the pubis‐uterine fundus distance at rest and with the Valsalva maneuver. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To validate an ultrasound software that uses transperineal ultrasound to diagnose uterine prolapse (UP). Methods: Multicenter, observational and prospective study with 155 patients that had indications for surgical intervention for dysfunctional pelvic floor pathology. Each patient underwent an examination with Pozzi tenaculum forceps was performed in the operating room with the patient anesthetized, followed by surgical correction of stages II–IV UP. Transperineal ultrasound was used to assess the difference in the pubis–uterine fundus measurement. With a multivariate logistic regression binary model (with the measurement ultrasound at rest, the Valsalva maneuver and age) using nonautomated methods to predict UP. With the purpose of evaluating the model, a table with coordinates of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, after which sensitivity and specificity were assessed. Results: A total of 153 patients were included (73 with a diagnosis of surgical UP). It was obtained from the AUC (0.89) of the probabilities predicted by the model (95% confidence interval, 0.84–0.95; P <.0005). Based on the ROC curve for the model, obtaining a sensitivity of 91.8% and a specificity of 72.7%, values that were superior to those for the clinical exam for surgical UP (sensitivity: 80.8%; specificity: 71.3%). Conclusions: We validated software that uses transperineal ultrasound of the pelvic floor and patient age to generate a more reliable diagnosis of surgical UP than that obtained from clinical examinations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]