Comparison of transperineal ultrasound findings and pelvic organ prolapse quantification examination in women with pelvic organ prolapse: A prospective cross-sectional study.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Esmaiel Kheradi, Maryam Mirzaei, Rana Eftekhar Vaghefi, Zohreh Salari, Samira Sohbati
{"title":"Comparison of transperineal ultrasound findings and pelvic organ prolapse quantification examination in women with pelvic organ prolapse: A prospective cross-sectional study.","authors":"Esmaiel Kheradi, Maryam Mirzaei, Rana Eftekhar Vaghefi, Zohreh Salari, Samira Sohbati","doi":"10.29063/ajrh2026/v30i19.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to evaluate and compare the findings of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) with those obtained through the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system in women with symptoms of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). This cross-sectional study evaluated 30 women at a gynecological clinic in Kerman, Iran (March-August 2021). Prolapse severity was assessed during maximum Valsalva using both POP-Q and TPUS. Data analysis in SPSS-25 included Cohen's kappa for agreement and Student's t-test for mean comparisons. According to the POP-Q system, Stage II prolapse (POP-Q) was most common in the posterior compartment (78.8%), while TPUS most frequently detected anterior compartment prolapse (56.7%). The highest agreement was between POP-Q stage I anterior prolapse and TPUS anterior findings. Overall agreement was moderate (κ = 0.333), with a significant positive correlation between the two methods' severity assessments. The results indicate a moderate agreement between the POP-Q system and TPUS in the assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. TPUS appears to be a valuable complementary diagnostic tool, particularly for identifying conditions such as enterocele, rectal intussusception, and muscular defects. Further research with larger samples is needed. Given its ability to detect associated pelvic floor abnormalities often missed by physical examination alone, the incorporation of TPUS into the routine diagnostic workup for women with POP symptoms is recommended. Such an approach may improve surgical planning and reduce reoperation rates, and health policymakers should consider including TPUS in clinical guidelines as a standard adjunct to POP-Q assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":7551,"journal":{"name":"African journal of reproductive health","volume":"30 19","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African journal of reproductive health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29063/ajrh2026/v30i19.6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the findings of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) with those obtained through the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system in women with symptoms of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). This cross-sectional study evaluated 30 women at a gynecological clinic in Kerman, Iran (March-August 2021). Prolapse severity was assessed during maximum Valsalva using both POP-Q and TPUS. Data analysis in SPSS-25 included Cohen's kappa for agreement and Student's t-test for mean comparisons. According to the POP-Q system, Stage II prolapse (POP-Q) was most common in the posterior compartment (78.8%), while TPUS most frequently detected anterior compartment prolapse (56.7%). The highest agreement was between POP-Q stage I anterior prolapse and TPUS anterior findings. Overall agreement was moderate (κ = 0.333), with a significant positive correlation between the two methods' severity assessments. The results indicate a moderate agreement between the POP-Q system and TPUS in the assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. TPUS appears to be a valuable complementary diagnostic tool, particularly for identifying conditions such as enterocele, rectal intussusception, and muscular defects. Further research with larger samples is needed. Given its ability to detect associated pelvic floor abnormalities often missed by physical examination alone, the incorporation of TPUS into the routine diagnostic workup for women with POP symptoms is recommended. Such an approach may improve surgical planning and reduce reoperation rates, and health policymakers should consider including TPUS in clinical guidelines as a standard adjunct to POP-Q assessment.

盆腔器官脱垂妇女经会阴超声表现与盆腔器官脱垂定量检查的比较:一项前瞻性横断面研究。
本研究旨在评估和比较经会阴超声(TPUS)和盆腔器官脱垂定量(POP- q)系统在盆腔器官脱垂(POP)症状女性中的结果。这项横断面研究评估了伊朗克尔曼一家妇科诊所的30名妇女(2021年3月至8月)。使用POP-Q和TPUS评估最大Valsalva时脱垂严重程度。SPSS-25的数据分析采用Cohen’s kappa检验一致性和Student’st检验均值比较。根据POP-Q系统,II期脱垂(POP-Q)最常见于后腔室(78.8%),而tpu最常见于前腔室脱垂(56.7%)。POP-Q I期前脱垂与tpu前脱垂吻合度最高。总体一致性为中等(κ = 0.333),两种方法的严重程度评估之间存在显著正相关。结果表明POP-Q系统和TPUS在评估盆腔器官脱垂方面有一定的一致性。tpu似乎是一种有价值的辅助诊断工具,特别是在识别小肠膨出、直肠肠套叠和肌肉缺陷等疾病时。需要更大样本的进一步研究。考虑到TPUS能够发现单独体检常常遗漏的盆底异常,建议将TPUS纳入有POP症状女性的常规诊断检查中。这种方法可以改善手术计划,降低再手术率,卫生决策者应考虑将tpu纳入临床指南,作为POP-Q评估的标准辅助手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
African journal of reproductive health
African journal of reproductive health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The African Journal of Reproductive Health is a multidisciplinary and international journal that publishes original research, comprehensive review articles, short reports, and commentaries on reproductive heath in Africa. The journal strives to provide a forum for African authors, as well as others working in Africa, to share findings on all aspects of reproductive health, and to disseminate innovative, relevant and useful information on reproductive health throughout the continent.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书