English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

BACKGROUND This study explored symptoms and signs of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) evaluated by 4-dimensional pelvic floor ultrasonography and analyzed the relationship between delivery mode and POP. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 578 women who underwent 4-dimensional transperineal ultrasound were enrolled in this study. Obstetric history together with other clinical information were gathered from clinical questionnaires and gynecologists. Patients were thereafter classified into 4 groups: women with normal vaginal delivery, women with forceps delivery, women with cesarean, and nullipara women. We assessed symptoms and signs of POP among these 4 groups by use of 2 evaluation methods. The first method was clinical assessment applying International Continence Society (ICS) pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q). The second method was the use of ultrasonography in the quantification of anterior, middle, and posterior compartment prolapse. RESULTS Nulliparae women exhibited the lowest probability of POP (POP-Q: cystocele of 15.6%, uterine prolapse of 11.1%, rectocele of 20.0%; ultrasound exam: 6.7%, 8.9%, 13.3% in sequence), while women with forceps delivery had the highest probability of POP (POP-Q: 59.6%, 50.8%, 63.2% in sequence; ultrasound exam: 45.6%, 52.6%, 42.1% in sequence). Regarding the correlation between POP and delivery mode, the adjusted odds ratio was 2.40 (95%CI: 1.301~4.590) and 3.20 (95%CI: 1.651~6.121) in the normal vaginal delivery group and forceps group, respectively, compared with the cesarean group. CONCLUSIONS Four-dimensional pelvic floor ultrasonography can be used as a preferred method in evaluating POP. Regarding the relationship between delivery mode and POP, there is a significant correlation between vaginal delivery and POP.

Correlation Between Delivery Mode and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Evaluated by Four-Dimensional Pelvic Floor Ultrasonography