The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Quantification of major morphological abnormalities of the levator ani
Abstract
Objectives: Morphological abnormalities of the levator ani are found in a significant minority of women presenting with symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction. In this study quantification of such injuries using tomographic three‐dimensional (3D) pelvic floor ultrasound was attempted. Methods: In a prospective observational study undertaken at two tertiary urogynecological clinics, 262 consecutive women referred for complaints of lower urinary tract dysfunction and prolapse underwent an interview, clinical assessment and 3D translabial ultrasound imaging. Blinded offline analysis of volume datasets was performed at a later date using 4D View software. Main outcome measures were craniocaudal and ventrodorsal extent of defects of the pubovisceral muscle. Results: Avulsion injuries were diagnosed in 50 women (19%; 21.3% of the vaginally parous). Defects were found unilaterally (right, n = 17; left, n = 12) and bilaterally (n = 21). In some women they affected the entire volume; in others defects were visible in only two of 16 slices. Hiatal area on Valsalva was correlated weakly with defect score (r = 0.28, P = 0.05) and total defect width (r = 0.4, P = 0.005). Defect score (P = 0.001) and maximum width (P = 0.002) were significantly higher in women who presented with symptoms of prolapse. Defect score was associated with cystocele as assessed clinically (P = 0.021) and on ultrasound (P = 0.014). Conclusions: Depth and width of levator ani defects can be quantified by tomographic pelvic floor ultrasound. These parameters are associated with the likelihood of symptoms of prolapse and cystocele descent, but not with incontinence. Copyright © 2007 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Haylen, B. T., de Ridder, D., Freeman, R. M., Swift, S. E., Berghmans, B., Lee, J., Monga, A., Petri, E., Rizk, D. E., Sand, P. K., et al. (2010) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-009-0976-9 · Cited by 2,237
Haylen, B. T., Maher, C. F., Barber, M. D., Camargo, S., Dandolu, V., Digesu, A., Goldman, H. B., Huser, M., Milani, A. L., Moran, P. A., et al. (2016) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2932-1 · Cited by 461
Haylen, B. T., Maher, C. F., Barber, M. D., Camargo, S., Dandolu, V., Digesu, A., Goldman, H. B., Huser, M., Milani, A. L., Moran, P. A., et al. (2016) · Neurourology and Urodynamics · doi:10.1002/nau.22922 · Cited by 423
Frawley, H., Shelly, B., Morin, M., Bernard, S., Bø, K., Digesu, G. A., Dickinson, T., Goonewardene, S., McClurg, D., Rahnama'i, M. S., et al. (2021) · Neurourology and Urodynamics · doi:10.1002/nau.24658 · Cited by 246
Weemhoff, M., Vergeldt, T. F. M., Notten, K., Serroyen, J., Kampschoer, P. H. N. M., & Roumen, F. J. M. E. (2012) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-011-1524-y · Cited by 137
Metadata
- Authors
- Dietz, H. P.
- Venue
- Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-02-23
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 329-334
- ISSN
- 0960-7692 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-0705
- OpenAlex
- W2150550876
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantification of major morphological abnormalities of the levator ani. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/uog.3951
- The paper
- Dietz, H. P. (2007). Quantification of major morphological abnormalities of the levator ani. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.3951
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.