Effects of dynamic transperineal ultrasound and dynamic magnetic resonance imaging defecography in the diagnosis of rectocele
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-9752.2014.07.014
- VernacularTitle:动态经会阴超声与动态MRI排粪造影检查对直肠前突诊断的差异
- Author:
Chenyi XU
;
Shuqing DING
;
Yahong XUE
;
Yijiang DING
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Rectocele;
Dynamic transperineal ultrasound;
Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging defecography;
Constipation;
Outlet obstruction constipation
- From:
Chinese Journal of Digestive Surgery
2014;13(7):561-564
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the agreement between dynamic transperineal ultrasound (DTP-US)and dynamic magnetic resonance imaging defecography (DMRD) in the diagnosis of rectocele,and to compare the correlation and difference between the depth of rectocele measured by DTP-US and DMRD.Methods The clinical data of 18 female patients with rectocele who were admitted to the Third Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine from September 2011 to May 2012 were retrospectively analyzed.All patients received examination via DTP-US and DMRD,and the agreement of the 2 diagnosing methods was analysed.The accurate rates of the detection of other pelvic floor abnormalities by the 2 methods were calculated.The agreement of DTP-US and DMRD in diagnosing rectocele was analysed by Cohen's kappa test.The difference of the depth of rectocele measured by DTP-US and DMRD was compared by paired samplet test,and the correlation of the depth of rectocele measured by DTP-US and DMRD was analyzed by using the Pearson correlation coefficient.Results Of the 14 patients diagnosed by DTP-US,there were 7 patients with bladder prolapse,5 with unrelaxed pelvic floor,2 with uterine prolapse,2 with rectal internal mucous intussusception and 1 with enterocele; of the 18 patients diagnosed by DMRD,there were 12 patients with bladder prolapse,8 with unrelaxed pelvic floor,8 with uterine prolapse,6 with rectal internal mucous intussusception and 1 with enterocele.The agreement coefficient between DTP-US and DMRD in diagnosing rectocele was obvious (κ =0.737,P ＜ 0.05).The depth of the rectocele detected by DTP-US and DMRD were (15 ±6)mm (range,7-24 mm) and (27 ±7)mm (range,20-41 mm),with significant difference between the 2 groups (t =-16.124,P ＜0.05).There was a high coefficient between DTP-US and DMRD in detecting the depth of rectocele (| r | =0.874,P ＜ 0.05).The depth of rectocele detected by DMRD increased as the increase of depth of rectocele detected by DTP-US (| r | =1.000,P ＜ 0.05).Conclusions The agreement between DTP-US and DMRD in diagnosing rectocele is high.The depth of rectocele measured by the 2 methods not only has statistically significance,but also exists a high degree of correlation.While DTP-US is superior to DMRD in terms of quick diagnosis and better telerance of patients.
