Could pelvic floor sonography be a standalone method for excluding genuine stress urinary incontinence in women?

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Mariusz Malmur, Jakub Mlodawski, Marta Mlodawska, Marcin Misiek, Olga Adamczyk-Gruszka, Piotr Niziurski, Stanislaw Gluszek, Wojciech Rokita
{"title":"Could pelvic floor sonography be a standalone method for excluding genuine stress urinary incontinence in women?","authors":"Mariusz Malmur,&nbsp;Jakub Mlodawski,&nbsp;Marta Mlodawska,&nbsp;Marcin Misiek,&nbsp;Olga Adamczyk-Gruszka,&nbsp;Piotr Niziurski,&nbsp;Stanislaw Gluszek,&nbsp;Wojciech Rokita","doi":"10.5603/GP.a2023.0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Determine whether introital pelvic floor sonography with transvaginal probe (PFS-TV) can be an independent method in the diagnosis of genuine stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and to create a ultrasonographic diagnostic model to objectify diagnostic process.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The study involved 315 patients with a history of urinary incontinence problems. Based on the clinical examination and urodynamic examination, the final diagnosis was made. Patients were divided into two groups. Group I included women with SUI and Group II included patients without SUI (OAB and no-UI). Each patient underwent PFS-TV at rest and during straining. The groups were compared in terms of ultrasound parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients from both groups differed statistically in a significant way (p < 0.05) in terms of mean distance between the lower edge of the pubic symphysis at rest 19 mm vs 22 mm (Group I vs Group II) and during straining (D1 and D2) 22 mm vs 26 mm, the average value of the γ angle (at rest (γ1) 37.5° vs 40° and during straining (γ2) and 66° vs 58.5°, average difference value of angle γ during straining and at rest (γ2-γ1) 29° vs 14°, and frequency of urethral funneling 89% vs 17%. Two parameters studied during PFS-TV were included in the logistic regression model used to exclude the stress component of urinary incontinence. Diagnostic test parameters of model were sensitivity 86.6%, specificity 90.4%, accuracy 93.1%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PFS-TV makes it possible to exclude the stress component of urinary incontinence. The developed logistic regression model allows for the objectification of the results of ultrasound examination in patients with urinary incontinence.</p>","PeriodicalId":12727,"journal":{"name":"Ginekologia polska","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ginekologia polska","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/GP.a2023.0026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Determine whether introital pelvic floor sonography with transvaginal probe (PFS-TV) can be an independent method in the diagnosis of genuine stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and to create a ultrasonographic diagnostic model to objectify diagnostic process.

Material and methods: The study involved 315 patients with a history of urinary incontinence problems. Based on the clinical examination and urodynamic examination, the final diagnosis was made. Patients were divided into two groups. Group I included women with SUI and Group II included patients without SUI (OAB and no-UI). Each patient underwent PFS-TV at rest and during straining. The groups were compared in terms of ultrasound parameters.

Results: Patients from both groups differed statistically in a significant way (p < 0.05) in terms of mean distance between the lower edge of the pubic symphysis at rest 19 mm vs 22 mm (Group I vs Group II) and during straining (D1 and D2) 22 mm vs 26 mm, the average value of the γ angle (at rest (γ1) 37.5° vs 40° and during straining (γ2) and 66° vs 58.5°, average difference value of angle γ during straining and at rest (γ2-γ1) 29° vs 14°, and frequency of urethral funneling 89% vs 17%. Two parameters studied during PFS-TV were included in the logistic regression model used to exclude the stress component of urinary incontinence. Diagnostic test parameters of model were sensitivity 86.6%, specificity 90.4%, accuracy 93.1%.

Conclusions: PFS-TV makes it possible to exclude the stress component of urinary incontinence. The developed logistic regression model allows for the objectification of the results of ultrasound examination in patients with urinary incontinence.

盆底超声能作为排除女性压力性尿失禁的独立方法吗?
目的:探讨经阴道探头盆底超声(PFS-TV)能否作为诊断真性压力性尿失禁(SUI)的独立方法,建立超声诊断模型,使诊断过程客观化。材料和方法:本研究纳入315例有尿失禁病史的患者。根据临床检查和尿动力学检查,最终诊断。患者分为两组。组1包括有SUI的女性,组2包括无SUI的患者(OAB和无ui)。每位患者在休息和紧张时均接受PFS-TV。比较两组超声参数。结果:患者两组不同统计上显著地(p < 0.05)之间的平均距离在耻骨联合下缘静止19毫米vs 22毫米(组我vs组II)在紧张(D1和D2) 22毫米vs 26毫米,γ角的平均值(静止(γ1)37.5°vs 40°,在紧张(γ2)和66°vs 58.5°角γ的平均差值在紧张和静止(γ2 -γ1)29°vs 14°,和尿道的频率将89%比17%。在PFS-TV中研究的两个参数被纳入逻辑回归模型,用于排除尿失禁的压力成分。模型诊断试验参数敏感性86.6%,特异性90.4%,准确性93.1%。结论:PFS-TV可以排除尿失禁的应激成分。发展的逻辑回归模型允许客观的结果超声检查患者尿失禁。
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
Ginekologia polska
Ginekologia polska OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
15.40%
发文量
317
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Ginekologia Polska’ is a monthly medical journal published in Polish and English language. ‘Ginekologia Polska’ will accept submissions relating to any aspect of gynaecology, obstetrics and areas directly related. ‘Ginekologia Polska’ publishes original contributions, comparative works, case studies, letters to the editor and many other categories of articles.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信