ArticleScientific reports2022
Comparing two-dimensional ultrasonography with three-dimensional ultrasonography and MRI for the levator ani defects grading.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of an Intrapartum Pelvic Dilator Device on Levator Ani Muscle Avulsion During Primiparous Vaginal Delivery: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.International urogynecology journal · 2024Trial
- Pelvic floor support changes in postpartum pelvic organ prolapse with involvement of single and multiple compartments.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- A model to predict delivery time following induction of labor at term with a dinoprostone vaginal insert: a retrospective study.Irish journal of medical science · 2024Observational
- Research progress in pelvic floor ultrasound for assessing the morphology and function of levator ani muscle in women.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Levator ani defect (LAD) closely correlates with pelvic floor disorders (PFD). In general, LAD was graded by three-dimensional ultrasonography (3D-US) and MRI, which could be used hardly in some developing area. Our objective was to determine whether two-dimensional ultrasonography (2D-US), a method that is almost universally accessible, could be used to diagnose the LAD. 129 Chinese women with PFD were recruited for the LAD grading by 2D-US and 3D-US and MRI. LAD was classified into intact, partial and complete avulsions. The puborectalis attachment width (PAW) was measured by 2D-US and with the software on the three-dimensional MRI-based LAD models. The results were compared and analyzed using the weighted kappa and the Pearson's coefficient. Of the 119 patients, 64 were diagnosed with LAD by 2D-US, 70 were identified by 3D-US while 68 were confirmed by MRI. The LAD grading of 2D-US showed good agreement with MRI (kappa = 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.86) and 3D-US (kappa = 0.77, 95% CI 0.70-0.84). In regard to the consensus of partial or complete avulsions, 2D-US showed excellent good agreement with MRI (kappa = 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-0.97), superior than 3D-US with MRI (kappa = 0.55, 95% CI 0.36-0.71). Additionally, iliococcygeus avulsions detected by MRI (n = 7) were accompanied by complete puborectalis avulsions. The averaged PAW was 10.42 ± 5.57 mm measured by 2D-US, which correlated well with the results measured by MRI (Pearson's coefficient = 0.90). 2D-US, 3D-US and MRI showed the good agreement on LAD diagnosis. Compared with MRI and 3D-US, 2D-US was comparable in grading LAD, especially complete avulsions.
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.