ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2021
Pelvic floor assessment using magnetic resonance imaging after vaginal delivery and elective caesarean delivery.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative magnetic resonance imaging-based study of pelvic floor morphology and function before pregnancy and after primigravida vaginal delivery.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Examination of the Anorectal Angle and Pubococcygeal Line in Adults with Anal Disorders and Defecation Irregularities Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Journal of clinical practice and research · 2024Article
- Three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging assessment of levator ani in women progressing from full-term pregnancy to 10 months postpartum.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisWe aimed to compare quantitative static and dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements of pelvic floor changes during postpartum recovery from 1 week to 6 months after different modes of delivery.
methodsIn this prospective study, 51 primiparous women (vaginal delivery group: 30 women; elective caesarean delivery group: 21 women) underwent static and dynamic MRI at 1 week, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months postpartum to measure pelvic floor MRI values. Between-group differences in pelvic floor values at these time points were determined; subsequently, within-group comparisons according to time were performed. Analysis included independent samples t-tests and paired t-tests.
resultsThe puborectal hiatus line (H line), muscular pelvic floor relaxation line (M line), bladder-pubococcygeal line (B-PCL), and uterus-pubococcygeal line (U-PCL) differed significantly between groups during the Valsalva manoeuvre at 1 week postpartum (p < 0.05). The H line, M line, and B-PCL values differed significantly between groups during the Valsalva manoeuvre at 6 weeks postpartum (p < 0.05). There were few significant between-group differences in pelvic floor values at 3 months and 6 months postpartum. In the vaginal delivery group, the differences in the H line and M line at 1 week, 6 weeks, and 3 months postpartum were significant (p < 0.001). In the elective caesarean delivery group, U-PCL differed significantly at 6 weeks compared to 1 week postpartum during the Valsalva manoeuvre (p < 0.05).
conclusionsPelvic floor recovery primarily occurred during the early phase after delivery in both groups. Elective caesarean delivery had a non-significant protective effect on postpartum pelvic floor structure and function compared to vaginal delivery.
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.