Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35638253›Full record

ArticleUltrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology2022

Comparison of diagnostic criteria for significant anal sphincter defects between endoanal and transperineal ultrasound.

N A Okeahialam, R Thakar, A H Sultan

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Underdiagnosis of internal anal sphincter trauma following vaginal delivery.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2023
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

N A OkeahialamUrogynaecology and Pelvic Floor Reconstruction Unit, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0786-2354
R ThakarUrogynaecology and Pelvic Floor Reconstruction Unit, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, UK.
A H SultanUrogynaecology and Pelvic Floor Reconstruction Unit, Croydon University Hospital, Croydon, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8979-2304
St George's, University of London · GBCroydon University Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the agreement between three-dimensional endoanal ultrasound (EAUS) and four-dimensional transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) in measuring anal sphincter defect angle.

methodsThis was a secondary analysis of the PERINEAL study, which evaluated the effect of perineal wound infection on anal sphincter integrity. Women were reviewed once a week, until their perineal wound had healed or for up to a maximum of 16 weeks. At each visit, both EAUS and TPUS (the latter at rest and on maximum pelvic floor muscle contraction (PFMC)) were performed to evaluate the presence of external (EAS) and internal (IAS) anal sphincter defect and measure the defect size. The largest angle size of a defect at the same sphincter level was analyzed. A defect was deemed significant if it was > 30°. Kappa coefficient (κ), intraclass correlation coefficient and standard error of measurement (SEM) were calculated, using EAUS as the reference standard.

resultsIn 73 women scanned at weekly intervals, a total of 250 EAUS and 250 TPUS scans were performed. An EAS defect was found in 55 (22.0%) EAUS images and 47 (18.8%) TPUS images. An IAS defect was found in 26 (10.4%) images on both modalities. There was excellent agreement (κ = 0.87) between TPUS and EAUS in diagnosing the presence of an EAS defect and perfect agreement (κ = 1.00) in diagnosing the presence of an IAS defect. TPUS performed at rest had poor and moderate agreement with EAUS in measuring EAS and IAS defect size, respectively, with respective SEMs of ± 16.1° and ± 27.9°. TPUS performed during maximum PFMC had poor and moderate agreement with EAUS in measuring EAS and IAS defect size, respectively, with respective SEMs of ± 16.5° and ± 26.4°. Based on the SEMs, if the diagnostic cut-off of 30° for defect size on TPUS was used, an incorrect diagnosis of significant EAS defect could occur in approximately 9-36% of women and an incorrect diagnosis of a significant IAS defect could occur in approximately 4-15% of women, using EAUS as the reference.

conclusionsThis is the first study to compare directly anal sphincter defect angle measurements obtained on EAUS and TPUS. A cut-off angle of 30° should not be used for the diagnosis of a significant residual anal sphincter defect during TPUS examination. Further research is required to determine the optimal defect cut-off angle for TPUS. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Indexed as

Fecal IncontinenceObstetricsAnal CanalFemaleHumansPelvisPerineumPregnancyUltrasonographyendoanal ultrasoundOASIobstetric anal sphincter injurysevere perineal traumasphincter defectthird/fourth-degree teartransperineal ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID35638253
PMCPMC10100122
OpenAlexW4281732699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.