Skip to main content
Journal of Central South University Medical Sciences logoLink to Journal of Central South University Medical Sciences
. 2023 Aug 28;48(8):1267–1273. [Article in Chinese] doi: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2023.220577

盆底超声评估女性肛提肌形态及功能的研究进展

Research progress in pelvic floor ultrasound for assessing the morphology and function of levator ani muscle in women

LI Duo 1,2, LU Rong 2,
Editors: 宋 柳, 郭 征
PMCID: PMC10930840  PMID: 37875368

Abstract

Pelvic floor ultrasound can clearly visualize the position and morphology of pelvic floor organs, observe the pelvic organ prolapse in real-time, and quantify and analyze the degree of the levator ani muscle injury, which is the most common imaging method to assess the morphology and function of the levator ani muscle to date. The different ultrasound imaging techniques provide a variety of indicators, each with its own advantages and limitations.Furthermore, two-dimensional ultrasound is the basis of imaging, but it fails to detect cross-sectional images of the pelvic floor; three-dimensional ultrasound can acquire the axial plane of the levator hiatus; tomographic ultrasound imaging allows real-time observation of the levator ani muscle injury; shear wave elastography can provide a quantitative assessment of the contractility and elastic characteristics of the levator ani muscle in real-time. It is of great significance to summarize the basic principles of various ultrasound imaging techniques, summarize the ultrasound image characteristics of levator ani muscle and its hiatus in different populations and different states, and explore the cut-off values and diagnostic criteria-related ultrasound parameters for improving the diagnostic efficiency of pelvic floor ultrasound for levator ani muscle injury, leading to reducing missed diagnosis and misdiagnosis of lesions.

Keywords: pelvic floor, ultrasound, levator ani muscle


肛提肌在盆底肌群中发挥重要的支撑作用[1],肛提肌损伤将会导致盆底肌功能障碍,继而引发盆腔器官脱垂等一系列疾病。目前,临床评估肛提肌损伤的影像学方法主要是磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging,MRI)与盆底超声。MRI是诊断肛提肌损伤的金标准,但MRI检查存在金属类节育器、起搏器等禁忌证,且成本费用高、耗时长,不推荐作为首选方法。盆底超声与MRI存在较高的一致性[2-3],且盆底超声具有安全无创、可重复性、实时性等优势,已成为评估肛提肌损伤的首选方法[4]。本文就盆底超声评估肛提肌形态及功能的研究进展作一综述,以期为临床有效评估肛提肌损伤、早期诊断女性盆底功能障碍性疾病提供参考依据。

1. 肛提肌

1.1. 解剖及功能

女性盆底支撑结构主要由盆底肌肉、韧带、筋膜等结缔组织组成,盆底肌肉是提供盆底支持力量的最重要来源,分为3层结构,其主要构成部分是内层肛提肌。DeLancey教授[5-6]的“阴道三水平支持理论”和“吊床假说”指出肛提肌完整的形态及功能在女性盆底支持中起重要作用。肛提肌为一对左右联合呈漏斗状的扁阔肌,按其纤维起止及排列,分为耻骨直肠肌、耻尾肌和髂尾肌3部分,其起自肛提肌腱弓,向下内呈“U型”走形,包裹撑托阴道、尿道、直肠肛管等盆腔器官处于正常位置,同时也可控制排尿、排便、分娩等生理活动,是维持盆底功能的最重要支撑结构。

1.2. 形态及功能的影响因素

妊娠可严重损害女性肛提肌功能[7],分析其原因一方面是随着胎儿体重不断增加,子宫及盆腔机械压力持续压迫盆底肌肉,盆底软组织受到慢性拉扯易变薄;另一方面是妊娠过程中的激素变化,使得盆底肌肉松弛。且不同分娩方式对肛提肌的影响不同,相比于剖宫产,经阴道分娩的女性盆底肌肌力下降;盆腔器官脱垂、压力性尿失禁及膀胱过度活动的发病率均与盆底肌肌力相关[8-9]。在经阴道分娩的过程中,产钳助产和第二产程延长是导致肛提肌损伤的重要因素[10]。女性的雌激素水平随所处生理阶段而发生改变,并与盆底肌功能存在关联。绝经后女性补充雌激素后,肛提肌厚度和盆底肌肌力均增加[11]。年龄增加、肥胖、腹压增加等因素均在不同程度上导致肛提肌功能下降[12],其中妊娠和经阴道分娩是肛提肌损伤主要独立风险因素[13]

2. 超声评估肛提肌形态及功能

早在20世纪80年代,国外学者应用经腹部二维超声成像研究女性压力性尿失禁[14]与盆腔器官脱垂。经过数十年的研究与实践,盆底超声已有经阴道、经直肠、经会阴等检查途径。研究[15]证实,经腹扫查易受肠气及耻骨影响,无法清楚显示盆底结构;经阴道及直肠扫查,探头不可避免施压于附近组织,引起盆底器官结构形态与位置改变而出现假阴性结果;经会阴扫查,能在正中矢状面清晰地显示盆底器官的形态位置及运动,且操作方便、患者无不适感,被公认为首选的检查途径。盆底超声检查方法也由二维超声成像发展到三维、四维超声成像,断层超声成像(tomographic ultrasound imaging,TUI),剪切波弹性成像(shear wave elastography,SWE)等。二维超声成像作为盆底超声的基础方法,能定量评估盆腔器官脱垂等情况;三维超声成像能采集盆底容积数据,量化肛提肌损伤;TUI以三维超声成像为基础,采集肛提肌裂孔多层面图像信息;新开发的SWE能实时动态、无创定量地评估盆底肌肉收缩功能与弹性。以上超声成像技术相辅相成,在全面评估肛提肌形态及功能方面起重要作用。

2.1. 二维超声成像

二维超声成像切面是盆底超声检查的基础,是评价盆底功能应用最成熟的超声技术。通常先启用二维超声成像检查模式,经会阴扫查不同状态(静息、最大Valsalva及缩肛状态)下肛提肌的走形、厚度及肛提肌裂孔前后径的改变;在盆底旁矢状切面,通过观察左右侧耻骨直肠肌的长轴,对肛提肌的完整性进行初步筛查。研究证实:在盆底旁矢状切面若观察到单侧或双侧肛提肌连续性回声中断,耻骨直肠肌断端呈“楔形”低回声,则提示肛提肌损伤,且与经会阴三维超声成像、MRI有较高的一致性[16];依据在盆底正中矢状切面测得的肛提肌裂孔前后径的变化可客观可靠地评估其收缩功能[17]。Ouchi等[18]测量28名盆腔器官脱垂女性盆底肌训练前后的肛提肌裂孔前后径,发现盆底肌肉强度与训练前后肛提肌裂孔前后径的变化呈正相关。Wen等[19]通过经会阴二维超声成像检查测量最大Valsalva状态下肛提肌裂孔的前后径来评估其裂孔是否异常扩张膨胀,并将前后径测量值大于6 cm定义为肛提肌裂孔扩张,以此来预测肛提肌损伤。但二维超声成像检查存在探测不到盆底横断面图像、无法习得肛提肌裂孔的轴平面、易导致漏诊一些病变等局限性。

2.2. 三维超声成像

三维超声成像检查可采集盆底横断面、纵断面及冠状面的组织信息,极大程度上弥补了二维超声成像的不足,完整清晰地显示盆底肌的立体层次及毗邻的组织结构,实时动态、多方位、多角度、多平面地观察肛提肌及其裂孔在不同状态下的变化。2001年国外学者Toozs-Hobson等[20]首次将三维超声成像检查应用于女性盆底功能障碍性疾病的诊断。2005年Dietz等[21]证实,三维超声成像可显示耻骨直肠肌及肛提肌裂孔的生物力学指标,并将其广泛应用于盆底检查。三维超声成像用于检查肛提肌及其裂孔时,初始平面为盆底正中矢状切面,启动三维超声成像扫查模式后,采集盆底容积数据,可通过容积渲染、多平面和自由解剖等模式显示盆底轴平面,此平面上可观察到由肛提肌及耻骨支构成的“菱形”结构,从而测量肛提肌裂孔的前后径、左右径、面积及肛提肌夹角等数据。一项前瞻性研究[21]表明:在未孕女性耻骨直肠肌和肛提肌裂孔的各项生物特征指标中,超声参数是衡量肛提肌裂孔面积变化最有意义的指标。盆底肌肌力与收缩期肛提肌裂孔面积呈负相关[22],肛提肌功能与其裂孔面积大小之间存在着内在关联。女性由于妊娠、分娩等各种因素造成肛提肌损伤甚至撕脱,导致其裂孔像“气球样”增大膨胀,而盆腔器官可通过扩大的肛提肌裂孔脱出,发生器官脱垂[23]。器官脱垂的症状及体征与静息、最大Valsalva状态下的肛提肌裂孔面积密切相关[24]。通过观察测量肛提肌裂孔的大小评估肛提肌形态及收缩功能的变化,确定肛提肌裂孔面积的截断值对评价诊断女性盆底功能障碍性疾病具有重要意义。Dietz等[25]国外学者建议在最大Valsalva动作下,将肛提肌裂孔面积≥25.0 cm2定义为异常扩张;而Dou等[26]学者将在最大Valsalva动作下中国女性的肛提肌裂孔面积≥19.5 cm2做为异常扩张的指标,二者数值差异的原因可能是种族差异导致盆底解剖结构的不同。因此,需要多中心大样本的深入研究来细化不同地区、不同种族的超声参数指标,以期为临床制订新的诊断标准提供数据基础。

三维超声成像也存在一定的局限性:1)三维超声成像质量取决于二维超声成像的采集效果,其分辨率低于二维超声成像,尤其当会阴探头频率较高时,对盆底深部组织图像显示的清晰度不佳,易丢失一些细微结构的信息。2)多平面成像在重建时因不能充分显示肌肉组织与盆壁的连续性,呈现回声失落,旁矢状切面和冠状切面在观察范围内缺乏骨性参考标志,可能会导致一定的测量误差。3)三维重建技术由于具有容积厚度,常造成假阳性结果,且其图像显示不但需要后处理及分析,还依赖于病变部位与周围组织灰阶的差异大小,当二者差异较小时,三维重建图像较难显示。因此该技术不仅要求医师熟练掌握三维超声成像的基本原理及应用相应的操作技巧,尽量避免不利于成像的影响因素,而且需在完全掌握解剖知识的基础上具有对空间位置关系准确判断的能力,以此最终呈现清晰标准的高质量声像图。4)三维超声成像配备的容积探头及仪器相对于二维超声成像价格更加昂贵,且成像时间更长,增加了检查成本。因此,医师在临床工作中应严格把握三维超声成像检查指征,减少医疗资源的浪费。

2.3. TUI

TUI是以常规三维超声成像为基础,与CT、MRI横断面成像相类似,可连续采集肛提肌裂孔多个层面图像信息,有利于动态观察肛提肌及其裂孔的完整性、肛提肌与尿道间隙的距离,较全面地反映盆底肌肉的功能情况。2008年由Dietz等[27]首次应用TUI来诊断肛提肌损伤,提出TUI的标准成像切面,即以耻骨联合下缘确定最小裂孔平面,以 2.5 mm为层厚,从最小裂孔平面下方5.0 mm至上方12.5 mm连续扫查习得8个平面,其中要求中间3幅图像从左至右分别是最小裂孔平面、以上2.5 mm层面、以上5.0 mm层面,且3幅图像中的耻骨联合分别为“开放”“正在关闭”“已关闭”状态,在这8个平面上可量化肛提肌缺损的深度及宽度[28],其中至少3个及以上连续切面均出现异常回声插入,则可诊断肛提肌撕脱[29],其准确性及有效性较高[30]。当诊断肛提肌撕脱存在疑问时,还可通过测量肛提肌尿道间隙(levator-urethra gap,LUG)距离辅助判断。LUG是指在TUI图像上耻骨直肠肌附着点到尿道中心的距离。Dietz等[31]将在断层成像图像上至少3个连续轴向平面上LUG值>2.5 cm定义为肛提肌损伤撕脱,且LUG法与TUI切片定性分析诊断肛提肌撕脱具有良好的一致性。在亚洲主要人群、高危人群中分析肛提肌完全撕裂的LUG最佳截断值分别为2.365 cm[32]、 2.305 cm[33],未孕未产女性、首次自然分娩后女性中肛提肌损伤的LUG最低阈值分别为2.25 cm[34]、 2.4 cm[35],以上研究表明单一标准的LUG不普遍适用于所有女性,应针对所研究人群进行个体化LUG测量,结合有关人群的特异性参数来构建诊断模型,以确定个体LUG的临界值,提高TUI对肛提肌损伤的诊断价值。当发生肛提肌损伤撕脱时,不仅其形态学发生改变,盆底肌肉功能也已严重受损,易导致压力性尿失禁及器官脱垂等临床表现[36-37]。LUG与盆腔器官脱垂症状[38]、脱垂类型[39]密切相关,通过TUI技术测量LUG对于诊断盆底功能障碍性疾病有重要应用价值。TUI成像的准确性受操作手法与方法影响,对肛提肌完整性的扫查应从肌肉起点沿着肌肉纤维走行方向观察至肌肉终止点,避免遗漏。当TUI诊断不明确时,仍需联合分辨率较高的腔内探头、浅表线阵探头进行扫查。

2.4. SWE

1991年Ophir等[40]首次提出弹性成像技术,并通过检测组织的弹性模量来评价组织硬度。随后1998年Sarvazyan等[41]提出SWE技术,消除了传统静态弹性成像需探头施压、频率等因素的影响,且与常规超声相比,SWE技术的最大优势在于能够直接提供肌肉组织本身的生物力学信息,可在静息状态、最大Valsalva状态、缩肛状态下实时定量观察肛提肌,进而反映肛提肌的收缩能力。SWE的主要原理是通过发射高速聚焦的声脉冲对组织加以激励,在不同深度的组织聚焦而发出横向剪切波,再应用超高速成像技术采集剪切波,采用定量分析系统直接获取反映组织硬度的杨氏模量值,组织硬度与杨氏模量值呈正相关。弹性图以红绿蓝3基色原理来反映组织硬度,杨氏模量从大至小依次显示为红、绿、蓝。SWE早期研究主要集中于乳腺、甲状腺、肝等[42-44]组织中,且应用已十分成熟。近年来,利用SWE对骨骼肌的研究[45-46]引起广泛关注,通过测量骨骼肌的弹性模量来评估骨骼肌功能,但大多研究集中于浅表肌肉,关于盆底肌肉弹性的研究较少。应用SWE技术在不同状态下实时测量肛提肌的弹性模量来评估肛提肌收缩功能,可避免大量不必要的侵入性及创伤性的检查手段[47-48]。SWE技术检测的肛提肌弹性模量与肌电图结果高度相关[49],且与器官脱垂程度关系密切[48],可为诊断及治疗压力性尿失禁提供影像学证据[50-51]。Ptaszkowski等[52]认为盆底肌弹性模量与表面肌电图结果的关系无统计学意义,很难确定SWE在尿失禁中的诊断意义,还需要进行进一步的前瞻性研究。这可能是因为肌肉硬度与个体差异存在一定的相关性。Xie等[53]发现,在MRI和常规超声观察到肛提肌发生结构缺陷前,SWE即可评估其弹性功能的变化,表明SWE技术在早期评价盆底功能方面有较高的临床应用价值,在早期诊断肛提肌损伤及预测女性盆底功能障碍疾病中有较好的临床应用前景。

SWE技术在实际应用过程中仍存在部分局限性:1)当受试者明显超重时,脉冲波经会阴部传导将出现明显衰减,导致采集不到清楚的图像。2)医师在检查过程中探头对会阴施加压力,未正确指导患者配合Valsalva动作、缩肛动作及呼吸运动等不规范操作都会影响SWE结果。3)在检查过程中要求患者进行主观最大的盆底肌收缩动作,但这种收缩强度并不受控制,而肛提肌弹性的测量结果高度依赖于其收缩水平,造成各患者之间的测量条件并不统一。4)在实际临床工作中,对肛提肌的弹性测量通常是在最大可见肌肉区域进行,但肛提肌的弹性在不同部位存在差异。5)在脱垂严重的情况下,肛提肌会拉伸变形,在Valsalva动作期间完全显示肛提肌并保持探头绝对垂直方向仍存在困难,对于盆底器官严重脱垂女性,如何准确测量肛提肌弹性有待进一步研究。6)目前SWE判定肛提肌硬度的标准仍不统一,一定程度上限制了其在临床的广泛应用,尚需进一步的研究细化其评价标准,以提高诊断结果的准确性及可靠性。期望未来能深入开展更多的临床研究以制订更加规范化、更具可行性的测量方法,制订更加客观准确的参考阈值及指导理论,以减少主观操作及个体差异的影响,朝着精确诊断的方向不断发展。

3. 结 语

对于评估肛提肌的形态及功能,盆底超声多种成像技术相互补充,各具优势与局限性。二维超声成像可对肛提肌损伤进行初步筛查;三维超声成像能采集盆底容积数据;TUI能连续采集肛提肌裂孔多层面的图像信息;SWE通过定量评估肛提肌的弹性及收缩功能,反映盆底肌群的损伤情况。但盆底超声由于受操作手法、患者配合程度以及种族差异等因素的影响,有关肛提肌及其裂孔等的超声截断值尚无统一定论。相信随着盆底超声的不断探索发展,未来将会开发更新的成像技术,制订更精确统一的超声参数,为临床诊治工作提供更全面准确的影像学信息。

所有作者阅读并同意最终的文本。

基金资助

湖南省自然科学基金(2023JJ30920)。

This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province, China (2023JJ30920).

利益冲突声明

作者声称无任何利益冲突。

作者贡献

李多 文献收集及论文撰写,鲁蓉 论文审阅、修订。

原文网址

http://xbyxb.csu.edu.cn/xbwk/fileup/PDF/2023081267.pdf

参考文献

  • 1. Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. Functional anatomy of the female pelvic floor[J]. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 2007, 1101: 266-296. 10.1196/annals.1389.034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Calderwood CS, Thurmond A, Holland A, et al. Comparing 3-dimensional ultrasound to 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of levator ani defects[J]. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg, 2018, 24(4): 295-300. 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000485. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Luo Y, Yang L, Lin N, et al. Comparison of translabial three-dimensional ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging for the grading of levator ani defects[J/OL]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2021, 100(20): e25997[2022-11-01]. 10.1097/md.0000000000025997. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Notten KJB, Vergeldt TFM, van Kuijk SMJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and clinical implications of translabial ultrasound for the assessment of levator ani defects and levator ani biometry in women with pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review[J]. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg, 2017, 23(6): 420-428. 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. DeLancey JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1992, 166(6 Pt 1): 1717-1728. 10.1016/0002-9378(92)91562-o. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. DeLancey JO. Structural support of the urethra as it relates to stress urinary incontinence: the hammock hypothesis[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1994, 170(6): 1713-1723. 10.1016/s0002-9378(94)70346-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Kamisan Atan I, Zhang WY, Shek KL, et al. Does pregnancy affect pelvic floor functional anatomy? A retrospective study[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2021, 259: 26-31. 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.01.047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Blomquist JL, Carroll M, Muñoz A, et al. Pelvic floor muscle strength and the incidence of pelvic floor disorders after vaginal and cesarean delivery[J/OL]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2020, 222(1): 62.e61-62. e68[2022-11-01]. 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.08.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Blomquist JL, Muñoz A, Carroll M, et al. Association of delivery mode with pelvic floor disorders after childbirth[J]. JAMA, 2018, 320(23): 2438-2447. 10.1001/jama.2018.18315. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Caudwell-Hall J, Kamisan Atan I, Martin A, et al. Intrapartum predictors of maternal levator ani injury[J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2017, 96(4): 426-431. 10.1111/aogs.13103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Marques Gomes Delmanto LR, Omodei MS, Bueloni-Dias F, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound evaluation of the pelvic floor in postmenopausal women using hormone therapy[J]. Maturitas, 2021, 143: 65-71. 10.1016/j.maturitas.2020.08.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Gümüşsoy S, Öztürk R, Kavlak O, et al. Investigating pelvic floor muscle strength in women of reproductive age and factors affecting it[J]. Clin Nurs Res, 2021, 30(7): 1047-1058. 10.1177/10547738211000350. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Cattani L, Decoene J, Page AS, et al. Pregnancy, labour and delivery as risk factors for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2021, 32(7): 1623-1631. 10.1007/s00192-021-04724-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. White RD, McQuown D, McCarthy TA, et al. Real-time ultrasonography in the evaluation of urinary stress incontinence[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1980, 138(2): 235-237. 10.1016/0002-9378(80)90046-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Vellucci F, Regini C, Barbanti C, et al. Pelvic floor evaluation with transperineal ultrasound: a new approach[J]. Minerva Ginecol, 2018, 70(1): 58-68. 10.23736/S0026-4784.17.04121-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Luo YJ, Pan HH, Yang LX, et al. Comparing two-dimensional ultrasonography with three-dimensional ultrasonography and MRI for the levator ani defects grading[J]. Sci Rep, 2022, 12(1): 9175. 10.1038/s41598-022-13427-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Nyhus MØ, Oversand SH, Salvesen Ø, et al. Ultrasound assessment of pelvic floor muscle contraction: reliability and development of an ultrasound-based contraction scale[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2020, 55(1): 125-131. 10.1002/uog.20382. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Ouchi M, Kitta T, Suzuki S, et al. Evaluating pelvic floor muscle contractility using two-dimensional transperineal ultrasonography in patients with pelvic organ prolapse[J]. Neurourol Urodyn, 2019, 38(5): 1363-1369. 10.1002/nau.23987. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Wen LM, Zhou QC. Can we evaluate hiatal ballooning by measuring the anteroposterior diameter with 2-dimensional translabial ultrasonography?[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2018, 37(4): 1001-1006. 10.1002/jum.14445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Toozs-Hobson P, Khullar V, Cardozo L. Three-dimensional ultrasound: a novel technique for investigating the urethral sphincter in the third trimester of pregnancy[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2001, 17(5): 421-424. 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2001.00354.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Dietz HP, Shek C, Clarke B. Biometry of the pubovisceral muscle and levator hiatus by three-dimensional pelvic floor ultrasound[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2005, 25(6): 580-585. 10.1002/uog.1899. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Caagbay D, Fatakia FT, Dietz HP, et al. Is pelvic floor muscle strength and thickness associated with pelvic organ prolapse in Nepali women?A cross-sectional study[J]. Braz J Phys Ther, 2021, 25(2): 214-220. 10.1016/j.bjpt.2020.05.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Nishibayashi M, Okagaki R. Ultrasonographic evaluation of pelvic floor structure at antepartum and postpartum periods using three-dimensional transperineal ultrasound[J]. J Med Ultrason, 2021, 48(3): 345-351. 10.1007/s10396-021-01100-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Xuan Y, Friedman T, Dietz HP. Does levator ani hiatal area configuration affect pelvic organ prolapse?[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2019, 54(1): 124-127. 10.1002/uog.20210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Dietz HP, Shek C, De Leon J, et al. Ballooning of the levator hiatus[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2008, 31(6): 676-680. 10.1002/uog.5355. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Dou CR, Li Q, Ying T, et al. Determining “abnormal” levator hiatus distensibility using three-dimensional transperineal ultrasound in Chinese women[J]. Front Med, 2018, 12(5): 572-579. 10.1007/s11684-017-0561-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Dietz HP, Abbu A, Shek KL. The levator-urethra gap measurement: a more objective means of determining levator avulsion?[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2008, 32(7): 941-945. 10.1002/uog.6268. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Dietz HP. Quantification of major morphological abnormalities of the levator ani[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2007, 29(3): 329-334. 10.1002/uog.3951. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Dietz HP, Bernardo MJ, Kirby A, et al. Minimal criteria for the diagnosis of avulsion of the puborectalis muscle by tomographic ultrasound[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2011, 22(6): 699-704. 10.1007/s00192-010-1329-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Turel F, Shek KL, Dietz HP. How valid is tomographic ultrasound imaging in diagnosing levator and anal sphincter trauma?[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2019, 38(4): 889-894. 10.1002/jum.14767. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Dietz HP, Garnham AP, Rojas RG. Is the levator-urethra gap helpful for diagnosing avulsion?[J]. Int Urogynecol J, 2016, 27(6): 909-913. 10.1007/s00192-015-2909-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Zhuang RR, Song YF, Chen ZQ, et al. Levator avulsion using a tomographic ultrasound and magnetic resonance-based model[J/OL]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2011, 205(3): 232. e231-238[2022-11-01]. 10.1016/j.ajog, 2011.03. 052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Greenbaum H, Klein L, Alcalay M, et al. The optimal cutoff value for levator-urethra gap measurements using tomographic ultrasound imaging in avulsion diagnosis is population specific[J]. Neurourol Urodyn, 2020, 39(5): 1401-1409. 10.1002/nau.24353. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Gregory WT, Cramer M, Holland A, et al. Levator-urethra gap: normative data in a nonpregnant nulliparous population[J/OL]. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg, 2021, 27(12): e696-e700[2022-11-01]. 10.1097/spv.0000000000001115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Montaguti E, Cariello L, Dodaro MG, et al. The role of a new three-dimensional ultrasound technique in the diagnosis of levator ani muscle avulsion[J]. Neurourol Urodyn, 2020, 39(1): 455-463. 10.1002/nau.24236. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Handa VL, Roem J, Blomquist JL, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse as a function of levator ani avulsion, hiatus size, and strength[J/OL]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2019, 221(1): 41.e41-41. e47[2022-11-01]. 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.03.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Handa VL, Blomquist JL, Roem J, et al. Pelvic floor disorders after obstetric avulsion of the levator ani muscle[J]. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg, 2019, 25(1): 3-7. 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Kamisan Atan I, Shek KL, Furtado GI, et al. The association between levator-urethra gap measurements and symptoms and signs of female pelvic organ prolapse[J]. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg, 2016, 22(6): 442-446. 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Kozma B, Larson K, Scott L, et al. Association between pelvic organ prolapse types and levator-urethra gap as measured by 3D transperineal ultrasound[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2018, 37(12): 2849-2854. 10.1002/jum.14644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Ophir J, Céspedes I, Ponnekanti H, et al. Elastography: a quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues[J]. Ultrason Imaging, 1991, 13(2): 111-134. 10.1177/016173469101300201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Sarvazyan AP, Rudenko OV, Swanson SD, et al. Shear wave elasticity imaging: a new ultrasonic technology of medical diagnostics[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 1998, 24(9): 1419-1435. 10.1016/s0301-5629(98)00110-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Youk JH, Gweon HM, Son EJ. Shear-wave elastography in breast ultrasonography: the state of the art[J]. Ultrasonography, 2017, 36(4): 300-309. 10.14366/usg.17024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Swan KZ, Nielsen VE, Bonnema SJ. Evaluation of thyroid nodules by shear wave elastography: a review of current knowledge[J]. J Endocrinol Invest, 2021, 44(10): 2043-2056. 10.1007/s40618-021-01570-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Yang H, Sun Y, Tang Y, et al. Shear-wave elastography of the liver in a healthy pediatric population[J]. J Clin Ultrasound, 2020, 48(3): 139-144. 10.1002/jcu.22794. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Maïsetti O, Hug F, Bouillard K, et al. Characterization of passive elastic properties of the human medial gastrocnemius muscle belly using supersonic shear imaging[J]. J Biomech, 2012, 45(6): 978-984. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.01.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Roberts TJ. Contribution of elastic tissues to the mechanics and energetics of muscle function during movement[J]. J Exp Biol, 2016, 219(Pt 2): 266-275. 10.1242/jeb.124446. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Maßlo K, Möllers M, de Murcia KO, et al. New method for assessment of levator avulsion injury: a comparative elastography study[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2019, 38(5): 1301-1307. 10.1002/jum.14810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Tang JH, Zhong C, Wen W, et al. Quantifying levator ani muscle elasticity under normal and prolapse conditions by shear wave elastography: a prpeliminary study[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2020, 39(7): 1379-1388. 10.1002/jum.15232. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Morin M, Salomoni SE, Stafford RE, et al. Validation of shear wave elastography as a noninvasive measure of pelvic floor muscle stiffness[J]. Neurourol Urodyn, 2022, 41(7): 1620-1628. 10.1002/nau.25010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Yu H, Zheng H, Zhang XY, et al. Association between elastography findings of the levator ani and stress urinary incontinence[J]. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod, 2021, 50(4): 101906. 10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101906. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Li XM, Zhang LM, Li Y, et al. Usefulness of transperineal shear wave elastography of levator ani muscle in women with stress urinary incontinence[J]. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2022, 47(5): 1873-1880. 10.1007/s00261-022-03478-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Ptaszkowski K, Małkiewicz B, Zdrojowy R, et al. Assessment of the elastographic and electromyographic of pelvic floor muscles in postmenopausal women with stress urinary incontinence symptoms[J]. Diagnostics, 2021, 11(11): 2051. 10.3390/diagnostics11112051. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Xie M, Zhang XY, Liu J, et al. Evaluation of levator ani with no defect on elastography in women with POP[J]. Int J Clin Exp Med, 2015, 8(6): 10204-10212. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Central South University Medical Sciences are provided here courtesy of Central South University

RESOURCES