Upright 0.5 T open MR defaecating proctography proof of concept study: the inter- and intra-rater variability of pelvic floor measures using seated proctography
- PMID: 40944878
- DOI: 10.1007/s10334-025-01296-6
Upright 0.5 T open MR defaecating proctography proof of concept study: the inter- and intra-rater variability of pelvic floor measures using seated proctography
Abstract
Objective: We tested the feasibility, data quality, and reliability of an upright magnetic resonance defaecating proctography (uMRDP) technique using an Open 0.5 T ASG MRI scanner.
Materials and methods: Eight healthy volunteers (2 males) performed seated defaecation on a purpose-built radio-frequency commode coil in an Open scanner. An optimised T2-weighted HASTE sequence captured dynamic changes during all three phases of the Kegel manoeuvre. Inter- and intra-rater variability was measured from the pelvic floor (PF) metrices (M-line, H-line, distances of landmarks) extracted by two radiologists.
Results: All relevant PF landmarks could be identified and metrices were extracted with acceptable inter- and intra-rater variability. Intra-rater variation was marginal, with relative absolute differences ranging from 5 to 21% and 3.2-44%. Inter-rater variability was reported using correlation and Bland-Altman plots. Correlation between raters was satisfactory, with r2 > 0.93, and bias ranged from - 1.8 to 0.65 mm. Moreover, the limit of agreement in the Bland-Altman plot ranged from 5.8 to 20.4 mm, indicating satisfactory precision.
Discussion: The proposed uMRDP technique can be used as a feasible and reliable alternative to supine MRDP, without the necessity of gadolinium injection and bowel preparation. It can capture defaecation in a regular seated posture and can provide information complementary to standard-of-care fluoroscopic proctography for clinicians.
Keywords: Open magnet; Pelvic floor imaging; Repeatability; Reproducibility; Upright proctography.
© 2025. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
Declartion. Ethical standards: Ethical approval was granted by the local ethics committee (FMHS 215-0223). Each participant received a comprehensive description of the study, including possible inconveniences, and gave written informed consent before participation. Conflict of interest: The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
-
- Maccioni F, Alt CD (2018) MRI of the pelvic floor and MR defecography. In: Hodler J, Kubik-Huch RA, von Schulthess GK (eds) Diseases of the abdomen and pelvis 2018–2021: diagnostic imaging—IDKD Book. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75019-4_2 - DOI
-
- Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2022) RCOG Position Statement: Pelvic floor health. RCOG. https://www.rcog.org.uk/about-us/campaigning-and-opinions/position-state... . Accessed 02 April 2025
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources