nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.04.2014 | Original Article

Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging before and 6 months after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy

verfasst von: Robin M. F. van der Weiden, Elena Rociu, Guido H. H. Mannaerts, Marcel H. A. van Hooff, Mark E. Vierhout, Mariella I. J. Withagen

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The objective of this study was to correlate dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) measurements and pelvic floor symptoms in order to determine the value of dynamic MRI for evaluating vaginal vault prolapse both before and 6 months after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

Methods

This was a prospective, single-center cohort study in 43 patients who underwent a modified laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/hysteropexy operation using bone-anchor fixation and synthetic mesh. The study included dynamic MRI, POP-Q staging, and validated questionnaires before and 6 months after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. To assess MRI data, the pubococcygeal reference line and specifically defined anatomical landmarks for the separate compartments were used. Differences between pre- and postoperative measurements were evaluated with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and correlations at the 0.05 level were considered to be significant (Pearson correlation, two tailed).

Results

At 6 months, a statistically significant improvement was seen in POP-Q staging for all compartments. Dynamic MRI measurements only revealed a significant improvement after surgery for the apical compartment. The correlation between (changes in) MRI measurements, POP-Q measurements, and validated questionnaires was poor.

Conclusions

The value of dynamic MRI for evaluating and documenting changes in vaginal vault support and position after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is limited due to the poor correlation with both POP-Q staging and pelvic floor symptoms.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JOL, Klarskov P, Shull BI, Smith ARB (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:10–17PubMedCrossRef

Vierhout ME, Stoutjesdijk J, Spruijt J (2005) A comparison of preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of patients undergoing pelvic reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolpase using the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system. Int Urogynecol J 17:46–49CrossRef

Ginath S, Garely AD, Luchs JS, Shahryarinejad A, Olivera C, Zhou S, Ascher-Walsh CJ, Condrea A, Brodman ML, Vardy MD (2012) Magnetic resonance imaging of abdominal versus vaginal prolapse surgery with mesh. Int Urogynecol J 23:1569–1576PubMedCrossRef

Broekhuis SR, Kluivers KB, Hendriks JCM, Fütterer JJ, Barentsz JO, Vierhout ME (2009) POP-Q, dynamic MRI imaging, and perineal ultrasonography: do they agree in the quantification of female pelvic organ prolapse ? Int Urogynecol J 20:541–549CrossRef

Lakeman MMA, Zijta FM, Peringa J, Nederveen AJ, Stoker J, Roovers JPWR (2012) Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to quantify pelvic organ prolapse: reliability of assessment and correlation with clinical findings and pelvic floor symptoms. Int Urogynecol J 23:1547–1554PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Singh K, Reid WMN, Berger LA (2001) Assessment and grading of pelvic organ prolapse by use of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:71–77PubMedCrossRef

Woodfield CA, Hampton BS, Sung V, Brody JM (2009) Magnetic resonance imaging of pelvic organ prolapse: comparing pubococcygeal and midpubic lines with clinical staging. Int Urogynecol J 20:695–701CrossRef

Brummen HJ, Bruinse HW, Pol G, Heintz AP, van der Vaart CH (2006) Defecatory symptoms during and after the first pregnancy: prevalence and associated factors. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 17:224–230PubMedCrossRef

Van der Vaart CH, de Leeuw JR, Roovers JP, Heintz AP (2003) Measuring health-related quality of life in women with urogenital dysfunction: the urogenital distress inventory and incontinence impact questionnaire revisited. Neurourol Urodyn 22:97–104PubMedCrossRef

10.

Van der Weiden RMF, Withagen MIJ, Bergkamp ABM, Mannaerts GHH (2005) A new device for bone anchor fixation in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: the Franciscan bone anchor inserter. Surg Endosc 19:594–597PubMedCrossRef

11.

Agildere AM, Tarhan NC, Ergeneli MH, Yologlu Z, Kurt A, Akgun S, Kayahan EM (2003) MR rectography evaluation of rectoceles with oral gadopentetate dimeglumine and polyethylene glycol solution. Abdom Imaging 28:28–35PubMedCrossRef

12.

Withagen MI, Vierhout ME, Mannaerts GH, Van der Weiden RM (2012) Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with bone anchor insertion: short-term anatomic and functional results. Int Urogynecol J 23:481–486PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

13.

Kummeling MTM, Rietbergen JBW, Withagen MIJ, Mannaerts GHH, van der Weiden RMF (2013) Sequential urodynamic assessment before and after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 92:172–177PubMedCrossRef

14.

Nardos R, Thurmond AS, Worstell TR, Clark AL, Gregory WT (2010) Reference lines in dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvic floor. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 16:242–245PubMedCrossRef

15.

Rahmanou P, Chaliha C, Khullar V (2004) Role of imaging in urogynaecology. BJOG 111(Suppl 1):24–32PubMedCrossRef

16.

Broekhuis SR, Kluivers KB, Hendriks JCM, Vierhout ME, Barentsz JO, Fütterer JJ (2009) Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging: reliability of anatomical landmarks and reference lines used to assess pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 20(2):141–148CrossRef

17.

Broekhuis SR, Fütterer JJ, Barentsz JO, Vierhout ME, Kluivers KB (2009) A systematic review of clinical studies on dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of pelvic organ prolapse: the use of reference lines and anatomical landmarks. Int Urogynecol J 20:721–729CrossRef

18.

Balgobin S, Good MM, Dillon SJ, Corton MM (2013) Lowest colpopexy scral fixation point alters vaginal axis and cul-de-sac depth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 208:488.e1–488.e6CrossRef

19.

Morren GL, Balasingam AG, Wells JE, Hunter AM, Coates RH, Perry RE (2005) Triphasic MRI of pelvic organ descent: sources of measurement error. Eur J Radiol 54:276–283PubMedCrossRef

20.

Hsu Y, Chen L, Summers A, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JOL (2008) Anterior vaginal length and degree of anterior compartment prolapse seen on dynamic MRI. Int Urogynecol J 19:137–142CrossRef

21.

Adekanmi OA, Freeman RM, Jackson SA, Puckett M, Bombieri L, Waterfield MR (2009) Do the anatomical defects associated with cystocoele affect the outcome of anterior repair? A clinical and radiological study. Int Urogynecol J 20:1369–1377CrossRef

22.

Lewicky-Gaupp C, Yousuf A, Larson KA, Fenner DE, DeLancey JOL (2010) Structural position of the posterior vagina and pelvic floor in women with and without posterior vaginal prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 202:497.e1–497.e6

23.

Lienemann A, Sprenger D, Anthuber C, Baron A, Reiser M (2001) Functional cine magnetic resonance imaging in women after abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol 97:81–85PubMedCrossRef

24.

Rane A, Lim YN, Withey G, Muller R (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging findings following three different vaginal vault prolapse repair procedures: a randomised study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 44:135–139PubMedCrossRef

25.

Sze EH, Meranus J, Kohli N, Miklos JR, Karram MM (2001) Vaginal configuration on MRI after abdominal sacrocolpopexy and sacrospinous ligament suspension. Int Urogynecol J 12:375–379CrossRef

26.

Funt MI, Thompson JD, Birch H (1978) Normal vaginal axis. South Med J 71(1534):1535, 1552

27.

Nichols DH, Milley PS, Randall CL (1970) Significance of restoration of normal vaginal depth and axis. Obstet Gynecol 36:251–256PubMed

28.

Withagen MIJ, Vierhout ME, Milani AL, Mannaerts GHH, Kluivers KB, van der Weiden RMF (2013) Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy versus total vaginal mesh for vault prolapse; comparison of cohorts. Gynecol Surg 10:143–150CrossRef

29.

Milani AL, Withagen MI, Vierhout ME (2009) Trocar-guided total tension-free vaginal mesh repair of post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 20:1202–1211CrossRef

30.

Muffly TM, Diwadkar GB, Paraiso MFR (2010) Lumbosacral osteomyelitis after robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy and sacral colpopexy. Int Urogynecol J 21:1569–1571PubMedCrossRef

31.

Schofield MLA, Higgs P, Hawnaur JM (2005) MRI findings following laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Clin Radiol 60:333–339PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging before and 6 months after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy
verfasst von: Robin M. F. van der Weiden
Elena Rociu
Guido H. H. Mannaerts
Marcel H. A. van Hooff
Mark E. Vierhout
Mariella I. J. Withagen
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2014
Verlag: Springer London
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-013-2254-0

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging before and 6 months after laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy