» Articles » PMID: 26670577

The Prevalence of Abnormal Posterior Compartment Anatomy and Its Association with Obstructed Defecation Symptoms in Urogynecological Patients

Overview
Publisher Springer
Date 2015 Dec 17
PMID 26670577
Citations 17
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction And Hypothesis: Symptoms of obstructive defecation (OD) are common in women. Transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) has been used for the evaluation of defecatory disorders. The aim of our study was to determine the overall prevalence of anatomical abnormalities of the posterior compartment and their correlations with OD in women seen in a tertiary urogynecology clinic.

Methods: This is a retrospective study on 750 women seen at a tertiary urogynecological unit who had undergone a standardized interview, clinical examination, and 4D TPUS. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were undertaken to study the association between examination findings and symptoms of OD. This study was approved by the local human research ethics committee (Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee, IRB approval no. 13-16).

Results: The datasets of 719 women were analyzed. Mean age was 56.1 (18.4-87.6) years. Ninety-seven patients (13 %) reported fecal incontinence, 190 (26 %) constipation, and 461 (64 %) symptoms of OD. On examination, 405 women (56 %) were diagnosed with significant posterior compartment prolapse (POP-Q ≥ stage 2), which was associated with symptoms of OD (p < 0.0001). On ultrasound, 103 (14 %) patients had an enterocele, 382 (53 %) a true rectocele and 31 (4.3 %) had rectal intussusception. On multivariate analysis true rectocele (p = 0.003) and rectal intussusception (p = 0.004) remained significantly associated with symptoms of OD.

Conclusion: Both symptoms of OD and anatomical abnormalities of the posterior compartment are highly prevalent in urogynecological patients. Ultrasound findings of a true rectocele and rectal intussusception are significantly associated with obstructed defecation.

Citing Articles

Long-Term Outcomes of Transvaginal Sacrospinous Ligament Suture Rectopexy.

Chill H, Hadizadeh A, Leffelman A, Paya Ten C, Chang C, Goldberg R Int Urogynecol J. 2025; .

PMID: 40042604 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-025-06099-w.


Short-Term Complications Following Transvaginal Sacrospinous Ligament Rectopexy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Hadizadeh A, Chill H, Leffelman A, Paya-Ten C, Chang C, Lee J Int Urogynecol J. 2025; .

PMID: 40019590 DOI: 10.1007/s00192-025-06098-x.


Laparoscopic resection rectopexy (RRP) combined with mesh sacrocolpopexy (SCP) for obstructed defecation syndrome with pelvic organ prolapse in an interdisciplinary approach.

Rudroff C, Ludwig S Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2024; 16(2):231-236.

PMID: 38950538 PMC: 11366123. DOI: 10.52054/FVVO.16.2.017.


Early safety and efficiency outcomes of a novel interdisciplinary laparoscopic resection rectopexy combined with sacrocolpopexy for women with obstructive defecation syndrome and pelvic organ prolapse: a single center study.

Rudroff C, Madukkakuzhy J, Hernandez A, Otten J, Ulrici C, Karapanos L BMC Surg. 2024; 24(1):185.

PMID: 38877450 PMC: 11177501. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-024-02474-4.


Rectocele: Incidental or important? Observe or operate? Contemporary diagnosis and management in the multidisciplinary era.

Bharucha A, Knowles C Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2022; 34(11):e14453.

PMID: 36102693 PMC: 9887546. DOI: 10.1111/nmo.14453.


References
1.
Beer-Gabel M, Assoulin Y, Amitai M, Bardan E . A comparison of dynamic transperineal ultrasound (DTP-US) with dynamic evacuation proctography (DEP) in the diagnosis of cul de sac hernia (enterocele) in patients with evacuatory dysfunction. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2008; 23(5):513-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00384-008-0440-1. View

2.
Sonnenberg A, Koch T . Physician visits in the United States for constipation: 1958 to 1986. Dig Dis Sci. 1989; 34(4):606-11. DOI: 10.1007/BF01536339. View

3.
Dietz H, Steensma A . Posterior compartment prolapse on two-dimensional and three-dimensional pelvic floor ultrasound: the distinction between true rectocele, perineal hypermobility and enterocele. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 26(1):73-7. DOI: 10.1002/uog.1930. View

4.
Grasso R, Piciucchi S, Quattrocchi C, Sammarra M, Ripetti V, Beomonte Zobel B . Posterior pelvic floor disorders: a prospective comparison using introital ultrasound and colpocystodefecography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 30(1):86-94. DOI: 10.1002/uog.4047. View

5.
Dietz H, Rojas R, Shek K . Postprocessing of pelvic floor ultrasound data: how repeatable is it?. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014; 54(6):553-7. DOI: 10.1111/ajo.12250. View