Observational studyInternational urogynecology journal2026
A Comparative MRI Study of Superficial Perineal Musculature in Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse, and in Parous and Nulliparous Controls.
Observational study in International urogynecology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe objective was to investigate morphological differences in the superficial perineal muscles-bulbocavernosus muscle (BCM), superficial transverse perineal muscle (STPM), and perineal body (PB)-in women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) compared with parous and nulliparous controls, and their correlation with symptoms.
methodsThis observational study included 99 women: 66 with POP, 14 parous controls, and 19 nulliparous controls. Participants completed Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 (PFIQ-7) questionnaires and underwent 3.0 T MRI at rest and during Valsalva. High-resolution T2-weighted images were used for 3D reconstruction and volumetric analysis. The analysis incorporated relevant metrics of the BCM, STPM, and PB, including the assessment of BCM integrity with a particular emphasis on identifying ruptures. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was applied to explore the normal reference value for STPM volume.
resultsThe BCM volume was significantly smaller in the POP group versus nulliparous controls (469.0 mm
conclusionSuperficial perineal muscles, particularly the BCM and STPM, show significant morphological differences in women with POP. These differences include a reduction in the volume of BCM, as well as decreases in the length, width, and volume of the STPM. Rupture of the BCM is associated with colorectal-anal and prolapse symptom severity. Quantitative MRI assessment of these structures could serve as a valuable biomarker for evaluating pelvic floor support and POP risk.
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.