Assessment of a semiautomated pelvic floor measurement model for evaluating pelvic organ prolapse on MRI

Introduction and hypothesisThe objective of this study was to assess the performance of a semiautomated pelvic floor measurement algorithmic model on dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images compared with manual pelvic floor measurements for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) evaluation.MethodsWe examined 15 MRIs along the midsagittal view. Five reference points used for pelvic floor measurements were identified both manually and using our semiautomated measurement model. The two processes were compared in terms of accuracy and precision.ResultsThe semiautomated pelvic floor measurement model provided highly consistent and accurate locations for all reference points on MRI. Results also showed that the model can identify the reference points faster than the manual-point identification process.ConclusionThe semiautomated pelvic floor measurement model can be used to facilitate and improve the process of pelvic floor measurements on MRI. This will enable high throughput analysis of MRI data to improve the correlation analysis with clinical outcomes and potentially improve POP assessment.

[1]  G. Masselli,et al.  Dynamic MR imaging of the pelvic floor: a pictorial review. , 2009, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[2]  H. Pannu,et al.  Dynamic pelvic magnetic resonance imaging and cystocolpoproctography alter surgical management of pelvic floor disorders , 2001, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[3]  J. P. W. R. Roovers,et al.  Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to quantify pelvic organ prolapse: reliability of assessment and correlation with clinical findings and pelvic floor symptoms , 2012, International Urogynecology Journal.

[4]  Cordelia Schmid,et al.  Evaluation of Interest Point Detectors , 2000, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[5]  M. Brodman,et al.  MRI pelvic landmark angles in the assessment of apical pelvic organ prolapse , 2011, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[6]  Paul Bao,et al.  MRI-Based Segmentation of Pubic Bone for Evaluation of Pelvic Organ Prolapse , 2014, IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics.

[7]  Bruno Falissard,et al.  Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging for grading pelvic organ prolapse according to the international continence society classification: Which line should be used? , 2008, Neurourology and urodynamics.

[8]  A. Weitzenfeld,et al.  Image based measurements for evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse , 2013 .

[9]  S Halligan,et al.  Dynamic MR imaging of the pelvic floor in asymptomatic subjects. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  T. Kuehl,et al.  A comparison of preoperative and intraoperative evaluations for patients who undergo site-specific operation for the correction of pelvic organ prolapse , 2002 .

[11]  L. Mouritsen,et al.  Symptoms, bother and POPQ in women referred with pelvic organ prolapse , 2003, International Urogynecology Journal.

[12]  R. Reznek,et al.  Dynamic MR imaging compared with evacuation proctography when evaluating anorectal configuration and pelvic floor movement. , 1997, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  Paul Bao,et al.  MRI-based semi-automatic pelvimetry measurement for pelvic organ prolapse diagnosis , 2012, 2012 11th International Conference on Information Science, Signal Processing and their Applications (ISSPA).

[14]  J. A. Ashton-Miller,et al.  On pelvic reference lines and the MR evaluation of genital prolapse: a proposal for standardization using the Pelvic Inclination Correction System , 2013, International Urogynecology Journal.

[15]  Michel Boulvain,et al.  Incidence rate and risk factors for vaginal vault prolapse repair after hysterectomy , 2008, International Urogynecology Journal.

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

[17]  A. Weber,et al.  Anterior colporrhaphy: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques. , 2001, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[18]  M. Reiser,et al.  Dynamic MR colpocystorectography assessing pelvic-floor descent , 1997, European Radiology.

[19]  M. Vierhout,et al.  A comparison of preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of patients undergoing pelvic reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse using the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system , 2005, International Urogynecology Journal.