Skip to main content

The Central and Posterior Compartments

  • Chapter
Atlas of Pelvic Floor Ultrasound

Abstract

Translabial ultrasound has been utilized for prolapse quantification, not just for the anterior compartment, but in the assessment of central and posterior compartment as well.1, 2 The uterus itself may be difficult to identify because it is iso- to hypoechoic, similar to vaginal tissues. A specular (line-like) echo often indicates the leading edge of the cervix. At times, nabothian follicles help with identification of the cervix, but in postmenopausal women the uterus may be so small as to be virtually invisible on translabial imaging, even if there is significant descent. The same holds true for a retroverted uterus, especially if significant rectal contents or a rectocele shadow the area of interest, and a well-supported uterus may be outside the field of view, in particular if higher-frequency transducers are used. Needless to say, a full sonographic assessment of the uterus requires transvaginal scanning. Despite all those limitations, however, the cervix can often be located translabially (see Figure 5.1 for a second-degree uterine prolapse), and the same holds true for the apex of the vault after hysterectomy (see Figure 5.2).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Creighton SM, Pearce JM, Stanton SL. Perineal video-ultrasonography in the assessment of vaginal prolapse: early observations. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992;99(4):310–313.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dietz HP, Haylen BT, Broome J. Ultrasound in the quantification of female pelvic organ prolapse. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001;18(5):511–514.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175(1):10–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dietz HP. What’s “normal” pelvic organ descent, and what’s prolapse? ICS Annual Scientific Meeting 2006, Christchurch, New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dietz HP, Steensma AB. 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;26:73–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dietz HP, Korda A. Which bowel symptoms are most strongly associated with a true rectocele? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2005;45:505–508.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Davis K, Kumar D. Posterior pelvic floor compartment disorders. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006;19(6):941–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dietz HP, Clarke B. Prevalence of rectocele in young nulliparous women. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2005;45(5):391–394.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dietz HP, Steensma AB. The role of childbirth in the actiology of rectocele. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2006;13:264–267.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Beer-Gabel MMD. Dynamic transperineal ultrasound in the diagnosis of pelvic floor disorders: pilot study. Dis Colon Rectum 2002;45(2):239–248.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Beer-Gabel M, Teshler M, Schechtman E, Zbar AP. Dynamic transperineal ultrasound vs. defecography in patients with evacuatory difficulty: a pilot study. Int J Colorectal Dis 2004;19(1):60–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mellgren A, Bremmer S, Johansson C, et al. Defecography. Results of investigations in 2816 patients. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37(11):1133–1141.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Starck M, Bohe M, Fortling B, Valentin L. Endosonography of the anal sphincter in women of different ages and parity. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;25(2):169–176.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Damon H, Henry L, Bretones S, Mellier G, Minaire Y, Mion F. Postdelivery anal function in primiparous females: ultrasound and manometric study. Dis Colon Rectum 2000;43(4):472–477.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Williams AB, Bartram CI, Halligan S, et al. Alteration of anal sphincter morphology following vaginal delivery revealed by multiplanar anal endosonography. BJOG 2002;109(8):942–946.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gold DM, Bartram CI, Halligan S, Humphries KN, Kamm MA, Kmiot WA. Three-dimensional endoanal sonography in assessing anal canal injury. Br J Surg 1999;86(3):365–370.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Frudinger A, Bartram CI, Halligan S, Kamm M. Examination techniques for endosonography of the anal canal. Abdom Imaging 1998;23(3):301–303.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Schaefer A, Enck P, Fuerst G, Kahn T, Frieling T, Luebke HJ. Anatomy of the anal sphincters. Comparison of anal endosonography to magnetic resonance imaging. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37(8):777–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Peschers UM, DeLancey JO, Schaer GN, Schuessler B. Exoanal ultrasound of the anal sphincter: normal anatomy and sphincter defects. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104(9):999–1003.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Porges RF, Santos R. Simple ultrasound evaluation of the anal sphincter in female patients using a transvaginal transducer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;25(2):177–183.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yagel S, Valsky DV. Three-dimensional transperineal sonography for evaluation of the anal sphincter complex: another dimension in understanding peripartum sphincter trauma. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;27(2):119–123.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cornelia L, Stephan B, Michel B, Antoine W, Felix K. Trans-perineal versus endo-anal ultrasound in the detection of anal sphincter tears. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002;103(1):79–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Andrews A, Sultan A, Thakar R, Jones P. Occult anal sphincter injuries-myth or reality? BJOG 2006;113:195–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Starck M, Bohe M, Valentin L. The extent of endosonographic anal sphincter defects after primary repair of obstetric sphincter tears increases over time and is related to anal incontinence. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;27(2):188–197.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Hudson CN, Thomas JM, Bartram CI. Anal sphincter disruption during vaginal delivery. N Engl J Med 1993;329(26):1905–1911.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Faltin DL, Boulvain M, Floris LA, Irion O. Diagnosis of anal sphincter tears to prevent fecal incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106:6–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Steensma, A.B. (2008). The Central and Posterior Compartments. In: Atlas of Pelvic Floor Ultrasound. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-584-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-584-4_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-520-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-584-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics