Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31016336›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2020

Descent and hypermobility of the rectum in women with obstructed defecation symptoms.

Ghazaleh Rostaminia, Steven Abramowitch, Cecilia Chang, Roger P Goldberg

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urogynecology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05747027 (Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Transvaginal Rectopexy and Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Obstructed Defecation in Pelvic Organ Prolapse), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05747027 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Transvaginal Rectopexy and Ventral Mesh Rectopexy for Obstructed Defecation in Pelvic Organ Prolapse (PROD Trial)

TypeinterventionalSponsorEndeavor HealthRan2024 to 2025Enrolled15ConditionsObstructed Defecation, Pelvic Organ ProlapseArmsLaparoscopic abdominal ventral rectopexy, Transvaginal sacrospinous rectopexy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ghazaleh RostaminiaFemale Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS), Division of Urogynecology, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, 9650 Gross Point Road, Suite 3900, Skokie, IL, 60076, USA. ghazalerostaminia@yahoo.com.
Steven AbramowitchDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Cecilia ChangNorthShore University HealthSystem Research Institute, Evanston, IL, USA.
Roger P GoldbergDivision of Urogynecology, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Skokie, IL, USA.
NorthShore University HealthSystem · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisObstructed defecation symptoms (ODS) are common in women; however, the key underlying anatomic factors remain poorly understood. We investigated rectal mobility and support defects in women with and without ODS using pelvic floor ultrasound and MR defecography.

methodsThis prospective case-control study categorized subjects based on questions 7, 8 and 14 on the PFDI-20, which asks about obstructed defecation symptoms. All subjects underwent an interview, examination and pelvic floor ultrasound, and a subset of 16 subjects underwent MR defecography. The cul de sac-to-anorectal junction distance at rest and during maximum strain was measured on ultrasound and MRI images. The 'compression ratio' was calculated by dividing the change in rectovaginal septum length by its rest length to quantify rectal folding and hypermobility during dynamic imaging and to correlate with ODS.

resultsSixty-two women were recruited, 32 cases and 30 controls. There were no statistically significant differences in age, parity, BMI or stage of rectocele between groups. A threshold analysis indicated the risk of ODS was 32 times greater (OR 32.5, 95% CI 4.8-217.1, p = 0.0003) among women with a high compression ratio (≥ 14) compared with those with a low compression ratio (< 14) after controlling for age, BMI, parity, stool type and BM frequency.

conclusionsFemale ODS are associated with distinct alterations in rectal mobility and support that can be clearly observed on dynamic ultrasound. The defects in rectal support were quantifiable using a compression ratio metric, and these defects strongly predicted the likelihood of symptoms; interestingly, the presence or degree of rectocele defects played no role. These findings may provide new insight into the anatomic factors underlying female ODS.

Indexed as

DefecationGastrointestinal MotilityCase-Control StudiesConstipationDefecographyFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedPelvic FloorProspective StudiesRectoceleRectumUltrasonographyVaginaHypermobile rectumMR defecographyObstructed defecationPelvic floor ultrasoundRectocele

Identifiers

PMID31016336
OpenAlexW2941712113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.