Observational studyEuropean radiology2019
Comparison of 3D endoanal ultrasound and external phased array magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of obstetric anal sphincter injuries.
Observational study in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility and reproducibility of a novel introital exo-anal ultrasound approach for assessment of the external anal sphincter.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- The Use of Transperineal and Endoanal Ultrasound in Diagnosis and Management of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries (OASIs): A Narrative Review from a Gynecologic Perspective.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Anal sphincter reconstruction for fecal incontinence: Techniques, outcomes, and future directions.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- A Gender Perspective on Coloproctological Diseases: A Narrative Review on Female Disorders.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Current update on the role of endoanal ultrasound: a primer for radiologists.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Review
- Diagnosis and Treatment of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries: New Evidence and Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Diagnostic approach to faecal incontinence: What test and when to perform?World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe gold standard of postpartum anal sphincter imaging has been the 3D endoanal ultrasound (EAUS). Development of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has allowed anal sphincter evaluation without the use of endoanal coils. The aim of this study is to compare these two modalities in diagnosing residual sphincter lesions post obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI).
methodsForty women were followed up after primary repair of OASI with both 3D EAUS and external phased array MRI. Details of the anal sphincter injury and sphincter musculature were gathered and analysed.
resultsThere was a moderate interrater reliability (κ = 0.510) between the two imaging modalities in detecting sphincter lesions, with more lesions detected by MRI. There was a moderate intraclass correlation (ICC) between the circumference of the tear (κ = 0.506) and a fair ICC between the external anal sphincter thickness measurements at locations 3 and 9 on the proctologic clock face (κ = 0.320) and (κ = 0.336).
conclusionsThe results of our study indicate that the use of external phased array MRI is feasible for detecting obstetric anal sphincter lesions postpartum. This allows for imaging of the sphincter defects in centres where EAUS imaging is not available. KEY POINTS: • A two centre prospective study that showed external phased array MRI to be a valid imaging modality for diagnosing obstetric anal sphincter injuries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.