Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Jan;23(1):73-7.
doi: 10.1007/s00192-011-1527-8. Epub 2011 Aug 6.

Comparison of the puborectal muscle on MRI in women with POP and levator ani defects with those with normal support and no defect

John O L DeLancey  1 , Helle Christina Sørensen, Christina Lewicky-Gaupp, Tovia M Smith
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of the puborectal muscle on MRI in women with POP and levator ani defects with those with normal support and no defect

John O L DeLancey et al. Int Urogynecol J. 2012 Jan.

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: The objective of this study was to compare puborectal muscle integrity and bulk in women with both major levator ani (LA) defects on MRI and pelvic organ prolapse (POP) to women with normal LA muscle and normal support.

Methods: This is a case-control study comparing 24 cases with known major LA defects and POP to 24 controls with normal LA and normal support. Axial T-2 weighted MRI scans of the pelvis were evaluated for integrity of the puborectal muscle and degree of muscle bulk.

Results: There were no significant group differences in age, body mass index, vaginal deliveries, or hysterectomy status. In all 48 subjects, the puborectal muscle was visible and had no disruption noted. There was no difference in muscle bulk between groups (control/case, thin 42% vs. 25%, average 42% vs. 38%, thick-17% vs. 38%; P = 0.47).

Conclusions: Defects and loss of muscle bulk in the puborectal muscle are not seen on MRI in women with major LA defects and POP.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest None.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Structural orientation to levator ani subdivisions and visibility of the puborectal muscle in MR images at two different levels (chosen from multiple contiguous sections as we followed the puborectalTA muscle from its origin at the pubic bone to its decussation behind the rectum); a lateral view of 3-D model with pubic bones, (B bladder, U uterus, R rectum), b levator subdivisions: without bones (PCM pubococcygeus muscle, ICM iliococcygeus muscle, PRM puborectal muscleTA, EAS external anal sphincter). c Level of the PRM decussation showing the scan plane for d, revealing the MRI at level of the PRM decussation (outlined), e level where the PRM “arms” project towards the pubic bone; f MRI at the level of the PRM “arms” (outlined in red)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Examples of PRM prominence at the point of decussation behind the anorectal junction
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
PuborectalTA prominence in cases versus control groups
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Terminologia anatomica=International anatomical terminology. x. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1998. p. 292.
    1. Kearney R, Sawhney R, DeLancey JO. Levator ani muscle anatomy evaluated by origin-insertion pairs. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(1):168–173. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lawson JO. Pelvic anatomy. I. Pelvic floor muscles. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1974;54(5):244–252. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dietz HP, Lanzarone V. Levator trauma after vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(4):707–712. - PubMed
    1. DeLancey JO, et al. Comparison of levator ani muscle defects and function in women with and without pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(2 Pt 1):295–302. - PubMed

Publication types