Three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging assessment of levator ani morphologic features in different grades of prolapse.

OBJECTIVE The study was undertaken to identify the morphologic changes in the levator ani in different grades of prolapse by using reconstructed three-dimensional models of magnetic resonance images (MRI) and to subclassify prolapse into different categories on the basis of their levator ani morphologic characteristics. STUDY DESIGN Sixty-one women were studied, 8 women in stage I, 15 women in stage II, 22 women in stage III, 7 women in stage IV prolapse, and 9 asymptomatic volunteers with stage 0 prolapse. Axial, sagittal, and coronal T2-weighted pelvic magnetic resonance scans were obtained with the patient in the supine position. The three-dimensional models were reconstructed from the source images by using manual segmentation and surface modeling. The morphologic characteristics of the puborectalis were assessed on these reconstructed models by measuring (1). the levator symphysis gap, (2). the width of the levator hiatus, and (3). the length of the levator hiatus. To assess the iliococcygeus, we measured (1). the maximum width of the iliococcygeus, (2). the direction of its fibers that was assessed by measuring the iliococcygeal angle, and (3) the levator plate angle. Nine nulliparous asymptomatic women were studied as controls. RESULTS Alterations in levator ani morphologic features are not dependent on the grade of the prolapse, and not all women with pelvic floor prolapse have abnormal morphologic features. In healthy control subjects, the iliococcygeal width measured less than 40 mm and the iliococcygeal angle measured less than 20 degrees. On the basis of the MRI findings, four patterns of changes in the levator ani have been identified. Both the levator symphysis gap and the levator hiatus, which is dependent on the puborectalis function, widen with increasing grade of prolapse. CONCLUSION It is possible to subclassify prolapse on the basis of morphologic changes in the levator ani by using MRI. This may be a very useful predictor as to which patients have recurrent prolapse develop after surgery.

[1]  J R Fielding,et al.  Two- and 3-dimensional MRI comparison of levator ani structure, volume, and integrity in women with stress incontinence and prolapse. , 2001, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[2]  W. Reid,et al.  Assessment and grading of pelvic organ prolapse by use of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. , 2001, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[3]  Y. Heloury,et al.  MRI evaluation of the levator ani muscle: anatomic correlations and practical applications , 2005, Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy.

[4]  L. Wall.  The muscles of the pelvic floor. , 1993, Clinical obstetrics and gynecology.

[5]  Visibility of pelvic organ support system structures in magnetic resonance images without an endovaginal coil. , 2001, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[6]  G. Lingman,et al.  The female pelvic floor: A dome‐not a basin , 1997, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[7]  J. Colling,et al.  Epidemiology of Surgically Managed Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Urinary Incontinence , 1997, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[8]  G. Jakse,et al.  The contribution of magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvic floor to the understanding of urinary incontinence. , 1993, British journal of urology.

[9]  K. Togashi,et al.  Study of uterine prolapse by magnetic resonance imaging: topographical changes involving the levator ani muscle and the vagina. , 1992, Gynecologic and obstetric investigation.

[10]  Kari Bø,et al.  Dynamic MRI of the pelvic floor muscles in an upright sitting position , 2001, Neurourology and urodynamics.

[11]  B. Hamm,et al.  Static magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvic floor muscle morphology in women with stress urinary incontinence and pelvic prolapse , 1998, Neurourology and urodynamics.

[12]  R Kikinis,et al.  Variations in levator ani volume and geometry in women: the application of MR based 3D reconstruction in evaluating pelvic floor dysfunction. , 2001, Archivos espanoles de urologia.

[13]  J. Ashton-Miller,et al.  MR Imaging of Levator Ani Muscle Recovery Following Vaginal Delivery , 1999, International Urogynecology Journal.

[14]  R Kikinis,et al.  MR-based three-dimensional modeling of the normal pelvic floor in women: quantification of muscle mass. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  H. Koelbl,et al.  Levator ani muscle morphology and recurrent genuine stress incontinence , 1993, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[16]  J. Ellis,et al.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Levator Ani With Anatomic Correlation , 1996, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[17]  L. Brubaker,et al.  The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[18]  E A Zerhouni,et al.  Pelvic floor descent in women: dynamic evaluation with fast MR imaging and cinematic display. , 1991, Radiology.

[19]  N. Hata,et al.  An integrated visualization system for surgical planning and guidance using image fusion and an open MR , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.