Novel Simulations to Determine the Impact of Superficial Perineal Structures on Vaginal Delivery

Overview

Journal Interface Focus

Specialty Biology

Date 2019 Jul 3

PMID 31263532

Citations 5

Authors

Megan R Routzong

Pamela A Moalli

Spandan Maiti

Raffaella De Vita

Steven D Abramowitch

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This study's aim was to determine whether the inclusion of superficial perineal structures in a finite-element simulation of vaginal delivery impacts the pubovisceral muscle and perineal body, two common sites of birth-related injury. The hypothesis, inferred from prevailing literature, was that these structures would have minimal influence (differences less than ±10%). Two models were made using the Visible Human Project's female cadaver to create a rigid, fixed pelvis, musculature held by spring attachments to that pelvis, and a rigid, ellipsoidal fetal head prescribed with an inferior displacement to simulate delivery. Injury site stretch ratios and fetal head and perineal body displacements and angles of progression were compared between the Omitted Model (which excluded the superficial perineal structures as is common practice) and the Included Model (which included them). Included Model stretch ratios were +107%, -9.84% and -14.6% compared to Omitted Model perineal body and right and left pubovisceral muscles, respectively. Included Model peak perineal body inferior displacement was +72.5% greater while similar anterior-posterior displacements took longer to reach. These results refute our hypothesis, suggesting superficial perineal structures impact simulations of vaginal delivery by inhibiting perineal body anterior-posterior displacement, which stretches and inferiorly displaces the perineal body.

Citing Articles

Influence of experimental conditions on some in-vitro biomechanical properties of the sow's perineum.

Lallemant M, Kadiake T, Chambert J, Lejeune A, Ramanah R, Mottet N Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):27455.

PMID: 39523424 PMC: 11551201. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-77675-1.

A systematic comparison between FEBio and PolyFEM for biomechanical systems.

Martin L, Jain P, Ferguson Z, Gholamalizadeh T, Moshfeghifar F, Erleben K Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2023; 244:107938.

PMID: 38056313 PMC: 10843651. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2023.107938.

Sacrum and Coccyx Shape Changes During Pregnancy and After Delivery.

Martin L, Routzong M, Moalli P, Rostaminia G, Abramowitch S Ann Biomed Eng. 2023; 52(2):292-301.

PMID: 37828266 DOI: 10.1007/s10439-023-03375-y.

An Integrated Method of Biomechanics Modeling for Pelvic Bone and Surrounding Soft Tissues.

Kou W, Liang Y, Wang Z, Liang Q, Sun L, Kuang S Bioengineering (Basel). 2023; 10(6).

PMID: 37370667 PMC: 10294892. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering10060736.

Novel Application of Photogrammetry to Quantify Fascicle Orientations of Female Cadaveric Pelvic Floor Muscles.

Routzong M, Cook M, Barone W, Abramowitch S, Alperin M Ann Biomed Eng. 2021; 49(8):1888-1899.

PMID: 33638030 PMC: 8376743. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-021-02747-6.

References

DeLancey J . Structural anatomy of the posterior pelvic compartment as it relates to rectocele. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 180(4):815-23. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70652-6. View

Samuelsson E, Ladfors L, Lindblom B, Hagberg H . A prospective observational study on tears during vaginal delivery: occurrences and risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002; 81(1):44-9. DOI: 10.1046/j.0001-6349.2001.10182.x. View

DeLancey J, Kearney R, Chou Q, Speights S, Binno S . The appearance of levator ani muscle abnormalities in magnetic resonance images after vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 101(1):46-53. PMC: 1226664. DOI: 10.1016/s0029-7844(02)02465-1. View

Harkin R, Fitzpatrick M, OConnell P, OHerlihy C . Anal sphincter disruption at vaginal delivery: is recurrence predictable?. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003; 109(2):149-52. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-2115(03)00008-3. View

Lien K, Mooney B, DeLancey J, Ashton-Miller J . Levator ani muscle stretch induced by simulated vaginal birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 103(1):31-40. PMC: 1226707. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000109207.22354.65. View

Herschorn S . Female pelvic floor anatomy: the pelvic floor, supporting structures, and pelvic organs. Rev Urol. 2006; 6 Suppl 5:S2-S10. PMC: 1472875. View

Ashton-Miller J, DeLancey J . Functional anatomy of the female pelvic floor. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007; 1101:266-96. DOI: 10.1196/annals.1389.034. View

Parente M, Jorge R, Mascarenhas T, Fernandes A, Martins J . Deformation of the pelvic floor muscles during a vaginal delivery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007; 19(1):65-71. DOI: 10.1007/s00192-007-0388-7. View

Shafik A, El Sibai O, Shafik A, Shafik I . A novel concept for the surgical anatomy of the perineal body. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007; 50(12):2120-5. DOI: 10.1007/s10350-007-9064-8. View

10.

Ashton-Miller J, DeLancey J . On the biomechanics of vaginal birth and common sequelae. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2009; 11:163-76. PMC: 2897058. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-061008-124823. View

11.

Li X, Kruger J, Nash M, Nielsen P . Anisotropic effects of the levator ani muscle during childbirth. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2010; 10(4):485-94. DOI: 10.1007/s10237-010-0249-z. View

12.

Li X, Kruger J, Nash M, Nielsen P . Modeling childbirth: elucidating the mechanisms of labor. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med. 2010; 2(4):460-470. DOI: 10.1002/wsbm.65. View

13.

Larson K, Yousuf A, Lewicky-Gaupp C, Fenner D, DeLancey J . Perineal body anatomy in living women: 3-dimensional analysis using thin-slice magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 203(5):494.e15-21. PMC: 3353407. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.06.008. View

14.

Jing D, Ashton-Miller J, DeLancey J . A subject-specific anisotropic visco-hyperelastic finite element model of female pelvic floor stress and strain during the second stage of labor. J Biomech. 2012; 45(3):455-60. PMC: 3558919. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.12.002. View

15.

Levy R, Zaks S, Ben-Arie A, Perlman S, Hagay Z, Vaisbuch E . Can angle of progression in pregnant women before onset of labor predict mode of delivery?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 40(3):332-7. DOI: 10.1002/uog.11195. View

16.

Fenton T, Kim J . A systematic review and meta-analysis to revise the Fenton growth chart for preterm infants. BMC Pediatr. 2013; 13:59. PMC: 3637477. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2431-13-59. View

17.

Wu J, Vaughan C, Goode P, Redden D, Burgio K, Richter H . Prevalence and trends of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in U.S. women. Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 123(1):141-148. PMC: 3970401. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000057. View

18.

Silva M, Oliveira D, Roza T, Brandao S, Parente M, Mascarenhas T . Study on the influence of the fetus head molding on the biomechanical behavior of the pelvic floor muscles, during vaginal delivery. J Biomech. 2015; 48(9):1600-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.02.032. View

19.

Tracy P, DeLancey J, Ashton-Miller J . A Geometric Capacity-Demand Analysis of Maternal Levator Muscle Stretch Required for Vaginal Delivery. J Biomech Eng. 2016; 138(2):021001. PMC: 4843853. DOI: 10.1115/1.4032424. View

20.

Ferreira J, Parente M, Jabareen M, Jorge R . A general framework for the numerical implementation of anisotropic hyperelastic material models including non-local damage. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2017; 16(4):1119-1140. DOI: 10.1007/s10237-017-0875-9. View