Xie Bing, Chen Luyun, Xue Zhuowei, English Emily M, Fenner Dee E, Gaetke-Udager Kara, Kolenic Giselle E, Ashton-Miller James A, DeLancey John O
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Int Urogynecol J. 2019 Aug;30(8):1269-1277. doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-03939-4. Epub 2019 Apr 10.
A wide variety of reference lines and landmarks have been used in imaging studies to diagnose and quantify posterior vaginal wall prolapse without consensus. We sought to determine which is the best system to (1) identify posterior vaginal wall prolapse and its appropriate cutoff values and (2) assess the prolapse size.
This was a secondary analysis of sagittal maximal Valsalva dynamic MRI scans from 52 posterior-predominant prolapse cases and 60 comparable controls from ongoing research. All eight existing measurement lines and a new parameter, the exposed vaginal length, were measured. Expert opinions were used to score the prolapse sizes. Simple linear regressions, effect sizes, area under the curve, and classification and regression tree analyses were used to compare these reference systems and determine cutoff values. Linear and ordinal logistic regressions were used to assess the effectiveness of the prolapse size.
Among existing parameters, "the perineal line-internal pubis," a reference line from the inside of the pubic symphysis to the front tip of the perineal body (cutoff value 0.9 cm), had the largest effect size (1.61), showed the highest sensitivity and specificity to discriminate prolapse with area under the curve (0.91), and explained the most variation (68%) in prolapse size scores. The exposed vaginal length (cutoff value 2.9) outperformed all the existing lines, with the largest effect size (2.09), area under the curve (0.95), and R-squared value (0.77).
The exposed vaginal length performs slightly better than the best of the existing systems, for both diagnosing and quantifying posterior prolapse size. Performance characteristics and evidence-based cutoffs might be useful in clinical practice.
在影像学研究中,人们使用了各种各样的参考线和标志点来诊断和量化阴道后壁脱垂,但尚未达成共识。我们试图确定哪种系统最适合(1)识别阴道后壁脱垂及其合适的临界值,以及(2)评估脱垂大小。
这是一项对正在进行的研究中52例以阴道后壁为主的脱垂病例和60例可比对照的矢状面最大瓦尔萨尔瓦动态磁共振成像扫描的二次分析。测量了所有八条现有的测量线和一个新参数——暴露阴道长度。采用专家意见对脱垂大小进行评分。使用简单线性回归、效应量、曲线下面积以及分类与回归树分析来比较这些参考系统并确定临界值。使用线性和有序逻辑回归来评估脱垂大小的有效性。
在现有参数中,“会阴线 - 耻骨内侧”,即从耻骨联合内侧到会阴体前端的参考线(临界值0.9厘米),效应量最大(1.61),在区分脱垂方面曲线下面积显示出最高的敏感性和特异性(0.91),并且解释了脱垂大小评分中最大的变异(68%)。暴露阴道长度(临界值2.9)优于所有现有测量线,效应量最大(2.09),曲线下面积(0.95),决定系数(0.77)。
对于诊断和量化阴道后壁脱垂大小,暴露阴道长度的表现略优于现有最佳系统。性能特征和基于证据的临界值可能在临床实践中有用。