Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical applications of pelvic floor imaging: opinion statement endorsed by the society of abdominal radiology (SAR), American Urological Association (AUA), and American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS)

  • Perspective from the SAR
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pelvic floor dysfunction is prevalent, with multifactorial causes and variable clinical presentations. Accurate diagnosis and assessment of the involved structures commonly requires a multidisciplinary approach. Imaging is often complementary to clinical assessment, and the most commonly used modalities for pelvic floor imaging include fluoroscopic defecography, magnetic resonance defecography, and pelvic floor ultrasound. This collaboration opinion paper was developed by representatives from multiple specialties involved in care of patients with pelvic floor dysfunction (radiologists, urogynecologists, urologists, and colorectal surgeons). Here, we discuss the utility of imaging techniques in various clinical scenarios, highlighting the perspectives of referring physicians. The final draft was endorsed by the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR), American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS), and the American Urological Association (AUA).

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL, et al. (2008) Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA. 300(11):1311–1316

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 89(4):501–506

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Denman MA, Gregory WT, Boyles SH, Smith V, Edwards SR, Clark AL. Reoperation 10 years after surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(5):555 e1-5.

  4. Fialkow MF, Newton KM, Lentz GM, Weiss NS (2008) Lifetime risk of surgical management for pelvic organ prolapse or urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 19(3):437–440

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Altman D, Lopez A, Kierkegaard J, Zetterstrom J, Falconer C, Pollack J, et al. Assessment of posterior vaginal wall prolapse: comparison of physical findings to cystodefecoperitoneography. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2005;16(2):96-103; discussion

  6. Kenton K, Shott S, Brubaker L (1997) Vaginal topography does not correlate well with visceral position in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 8(6):336–339

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rentsch M, Paetzel C, Lenhart M, et al. (2001) Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging defecography: a diagnostic alternative in the assessment of pelvic floor disorders in proctology. Dis Colon Rectum. 44(7):999–1007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kester RR, Leboeuf L, Amendola MA, et al. (2003) Value of express T2-weighted pelvic MRI in the preoperative evaluation of severe pelvic floor prolapse: a prospective study. Urology. 61(6):1135–1139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Burhenne HJ (1964) INTESTINAL EVACUATION STUDY: A NEW ROENTGENOLOGIC TECHNIQUE. Radiologia clinica. 33:79–84

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pannu HK, Javitt MC, Glanc P, et al. (2015) ACR Appropriateness Criteria pelvic floor dysfunction. Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR. 12(2):134–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kelvin FM, Maglinte DD, Hale DS, Benson JT (2000) Female pelvic organ prolapse: a comparison of triphasic dynamic MR imaging and triphasic fluoroscopic cystocolpoproctography. AJR American journal of roentgenology. 174(1):81–88

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vanbeckevoort D, Van Hoe L, Oyen R, et al. (1999) Pelvic floor descent in females: comparative study of colpocystodefecography and dynamic fast MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 9(3):373–377

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Attenberger UI, Morelli JN, Budjan J, et al. (2015) The value of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in interdisciplinary treatment of pelvic floor dysfunction. Abdominal imaging. 40(7):2242–2247

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Deegan EG, Stothers L, Kavanagh A, Macnab AJ. Quantification of pelvic floor muscle strength in female urinary incontinence: A systematic review and comparison of contemporary methodologies. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017.

  15. Bitti GT, Argiolas GM, Ballicu N, Caddeo E, Cecconi M, Demurtas G, et al. Pelvic floor failure: MR imaging evaluation of anatomic and functional abnormalities. Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. 2014;34(2):429-48.

  16. Broekhuis SR, Futterer JJ, Barentsz JO, Vierhout ME, Kluivers KB (2009) A systematic review of clinical studies on dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of pelvic organ prolapse: the use of reference lines and anatomical landmarks. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 20(6):721–729

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kobi M, Flusberg M, Paroder V, Chernyak V (2018) Practical guide to dynamic pelvic floor MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 47(5):1155–1170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pizzoferrato AC, Nyangoh Timoh K, Fritel X, et al. (2014) Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging and pelvic floor disorders: how and when? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 181:259–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gupta S, Sharma JB, Hari S, et al. (2012) Study of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of pelvic organ prolapse. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 286(4):953–958

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. van Iersel JJ, Formijne Jonkers HA, Verheijen PM, et al. (2017) Comparison of dynamic magnetic resonance defaecography with rectal contrast and conventional defaecography for posterior pelvic floor compartment prolapse. Colorectal Dis. 19(1):O46–O53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Friedman T, Eslick GD, Dietz HP (2018) Risk factors for prolapse recurrence: systematic review and meta-analysis. International urogynecology journal. 29(1):13–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fiaschetti V, Pastorelli D, Squillaci E, et al. (2013) Static and dynamic evaluation of pelvic floor disorders with an open low-field tilting magnet. Clin Radiol. 68(6):e293–e300

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bertschinger KM, Hetzer FH, Roos JE, et al. (2002) Dynamic MR imaging of the pelvic floor performed with patient sitting in an open-magnet unit versus with patient supine in a closed-magnet unit. Radiology. 223(2):501–508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Flusberg M, Sahni VA, Erturk SM, Mortele KJ (2011) Dynamic MR defecography: assessment of the usefulness of the defecation phase. AJR American journal of roentgenology. 196(4):W394–W399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pannu HK, Scatarige JC, Eng J (2009) Comparison of supine magnetic resonance imaging with and without rectal contrast to fluoroscopic cystocolpoproctography for the diagnosis of pelvic organ prolapse. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 33(1):125–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mulder FE, Shek KL, Dietz HP (2012) What’s a proper push? The Valsalva manoeuvre revisited. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 52(3):282–285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Khatri G, Carmel ME, Bailey AA, Foreman MR, Brewington CC, Zimmern PE, et al. Postoperative Imaging after Surgical Repair for Pelvic Floor Dysfunction. Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. 2016;36(4):1233-56.

  28. Schuettoff S, Beyersdorff D, Gauruder-Burmester A, Tunn R (2006) Visibility of the polypropylene tape after tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) procedure in women with stress urinary incontinence: comparison of introital ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in vitro and in vivo. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 27(6):687–692

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ram R, Jambhekar K, Glanc P, Steiner A, Sheridan AD, Arif-Tiwari H, et al. Meshy business: MRI and ultrasound evaluation of pelvic floor mesh and slings. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020.

  30. Singh K, Reid WM, Berger LA (2001) Assessment and grading of pelvic organ prolapse by use of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 185(1):71–77

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Broekhuis SR, Kluivers KB, Hendriks JC, et al. (2009) Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging: reliability of anatomical landmarks and reference lines used to assess pelvic organ prolapse. International urogynecology journal and pelvic floor dysfunction. 20(2):141–148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Flusberg M, Xi Y, Jambhekar K, Bahrami S, Chernyak V, Lalwani N, et al. Variability in utilization and techniques of pelvic floor imaging: findings of the SAR pelvic floor dysfunction disease-focused panel. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021.

  33. Dietz HP, Lekskulchai O (2007) Ultrasound assessment of pelvic organ prolapse: the relationship between prolapse severity and symptoms. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 29(6):688–691

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Volløyhaug I, Rojas RG, Mørkved S, Salvesen K (2019) Comparison of transperineal ultrasound with POP-Q for assessing symptoms of prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 30(4):595–602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Taithongchai A, Sultan AH, Wieczorek PA, Thakar R. Clinical application of 2D and 3D pelvic floor ultrasound of mid-urethral slings and vaginal wall mesh. Int Urogynecol J. 2019.

  36. Hainsworth AJ, Pilkington SA, Grierson C, et al. (2016) Accuracy of integrated total pelvic floor ultrasound compared to defaecatory MRI in females with pelvic floor defaecatory dysfunction. The British journal of radiology. 89(1068):20160522

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Kaufman HS, Buller JL, Thompson JR, Pannu HK, DeMeester SL, Genadry RR, et al. Dynamic pelvic magnetic resonance imaging and cystocolpoproctography alter surgical management of pelvic floor disorders. Diseases of the colon and rectum. 2001;44(11):1575-83; discussion 83-4.

  38. Dietz HP (2017) Pelvic Floor Ultrasound: A Review. Clinical obstetrics and gynecology. 60(1):58–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Dietz HP (2019) Ultrasound in the assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Best practice & research Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology. 54:12–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Aziz MU KG, Hess D, Zimmern P. Anterior Enterocele as an Etiology for Anterior Vaginal Wall Prolapse: A Magnetic Resonance Defecography Case Review Series. Abdominal Radiology 2019;Pending.

  41. Maglinte DD, Bartram CI, Hale DA, et al. (2011) Functional imaging of the pelvic floor. Radiology. 258(1):23–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kelvin FM, Hale DS, Maglinte DD, Patten BJ, Benson JT (1999) Female pelvic organ prolapse: diagnostic contribution of dynamic cystoproctography and comparison with physical examination. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 173(1):31–37

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kelvin FM, Maglinte DD, Hornback JA, Benson JT (1992) Pelvic prolapse: assessment with evacuation proctography (defecography). Radiology. 184(2):547–551

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Altringer WE, Saclarides TJ, Dominguez JM, Brubaker LT, Smith CS (1995) Four-contrast defecography: Pelvic “floor-oscopy”. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. 38(7):695–699

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Iacobellis F, Brillantino A, Renzi A, et al. (2016) MR Imaging in Diagnosis of Pelvic Floor Descent: Supine versus Sitting Position. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2016:6594152

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Kumar NM, Khatri G, Christie AL, et al. (2019) Supine magnetic resonance defecography for evaluation of anterior compartment prolapse: Comparison with upright voiding cystourethrogram. European journal of radiology. 117:95–101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Arif-Tiwari H, Twiss CO, Lin FC, Funk JT, Vedantham S, Martin DR, et al. Improved Detection of Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Comparative Utility of Defecography Phase Sequence to Nondefecography Valsalva Maneuvers in Dynamic Pelvic Floor Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2018.

  48. Hassan HH, Elnekiedy AM, Elshazly WG, Naguib NN (2016) Modified MR defecography without rectal filling in obstructed defecation syndrome: Initial experience. European journal of radiology. 85(9):1673–1681

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Khatri G, Kumar NM, Xi Y, Smith W, Bacsu C, Bailey AA, et al. Defecation versus pre- and post-defecation Valsalva maneuvers for dynamic MR assessment of pelvic floor dysfunction. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2019.

  50. Broekhuis SR, Kluivers KB, Hendriks JC, et al. (2009) POP-Q, dynamic MR imaging, and perineal ultrasonography: do they agree in the quantification of female pelvic organ prolapse? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 20(5):541–549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Gousse AE, Barbaric ZL, Safir MH, et al. (2000) Dynamic half Fourier acquisition, single shot turbo spin-echo magnetic resonance imaging for evaluating the female pelvis. The Journal of urology. 164(5):1606–1613

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Lin FC, Funk JT, Tiwari HA, Kalb BT, Twiss CO (2018) Dynamic Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluation of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Compared to Physical Examination Findings. Urology. 119:49–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Volloyhaug I, Rojas RG, Morkved S, Salvesen KA (2019) Comparison of transperineal ultrasound with POP-Q for assessing symptoms of prolapse. International urogynecology journal. 30(4):595–602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Dietz HP, Kamisan Atan I, Salita A (2016) Association between ICS POP-Q coordinates and translabial ultrasound findings: implications for definition of ‘normal pelvic organ support’. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 47(3):363–368

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Chantarasorn V, Dietz HP (2012) Diagnosis of cystocele type by clinical examination and pelvic floor ultrasound. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 39(6):710–714

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Dietz HP, Shek KL (2009) Levator defects can be detected by 2D translabial ultrasound. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 20(7):807–811

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Hetzer FH, Andreisek G, Tsagari C, Sahrbacher U, Weishaupt D (2006) MR defecography in patients with fecal incontinence: imaging findings and their effect on surgical management. Radiology. 240(2):449–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Dobben AC, Terra MP, Deutekom M, et al. (2007) The role of endoluminal imaging in clinical outcome of overlapping anterior anal sphincter repair in patients with fecal incontinence. AJR American journal of roentgenology. 189(2):W70–W77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Williams AB, Bartram CI, Modhwadia D, et al. (2001) Endocoil magnetic resonance imaging quantification of external anal sphincter atrophy. Br J Surg. 88(6):853–859

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Ekberg O, Nylander G, Fork FT (1985) Defecography. Radiology. 155(1):45–48

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Harvey CJ, Halligan S, Bartram CI, et al. (1999) Evacuation proctography: a prospective study of diagnostic and therapeutic effects. Radiology. 211(1):223–227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Wallden L (1952) Defecation block in cases of deep rectogenital pouch. Acta Chir Scand. 103(3):236–238

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Rao SS, Go JT (2009) Treating pelvic floor disorders of defecation: management or cure? Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 11(4):278–287

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Shorvon PJ, McHugh S, Diamant NE, Somers S, Stevenson GW (1989) Defecography in normal volunteers: results and implications. Gut. 30(12):1737–1749

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Dvorkin LS, Hetzer F, Scott SM, et al. (2004) Open-magnet MR defaecography compared with evacuation proctography in the diagnosis and management of patients with rectal intussusception. Colorectal Dis. 6(1):45–53

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Healy JC, Halligan S, Reznek RH, et al. (1997) Patterns of prolapse in women with symptoms of pelvic floor weakness: assessment with MR imaging. Radiology. 203(1):77–81

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Maglinte DD, Kelvin FM, Hale DS, Benson JT (1997) Dynamic cystoproctography: a unifying diagnostic approach to pelvic floor and anorectal dysfunction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 169(3):759–767

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Piloni V, Fioravanti P, Spazzafumo L, Rossi B (1999) Measurement of the anorectal angle by defecography for the diagnosis of fecal incontinence. Int J Colorectal Dis. 14(2):131–135

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Lienemann A, Sprenger D, Janssen U, et al. (2004) Assessment of pelvic organ descent by use of functional cine-MRI: which reference line should be used? Neurourol Urodyn. 23(1):33–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Bahrami S, Khatri G, Sheridan AD, Palmer SL, Lockhart ME, Arif-Tiwari H, et al. Pelvic floor ultrasound: when, why, and how? Abdom Radiol (NY). 2019.

  72. Dietz HP, Cartmill J (2013) Imaging in patients with obstructed defecation. Tech Coloproctol. 17(5):473–474

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Dietz HP, Hyland G, Hay-Smith J (2006) The assessment of levator trauma: a comparison between palpation and 4D pelvic floor ultrasound. Neurourol Urodyn. 25(5):424–427

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Cazemier M, Terra MP, Stoker J, et al. (2006) Atrophy and defects detection of the external anal sphincter: comparison between three-dimensional anal endosonography and endoanal magnetic resonance imaging. Dis Colon Rectum. 49(1):20–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Dobben AC, Terra MP, Slors JF, et al. (2007) External anal sphincter defects in patients with fecal incontinence: comparison of endoanal MR imaging and endoanal US. Radiology. 242(2):463–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Carrington EV, Scott SM, Bharucha A, et al. (2018) Expert consensus document: Advances in the evaluation of anorectal function. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 15(5):309–323

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Rao SS, Benninga MA, Bharucha AE, et al. (2015) ANMS-ESNM position paper and consensus guidelines on biofeedback therapy for anorectal disorders. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 27(5):594–609

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Rao SS, Seaton K, Miller M, et al. (2007) Randomized controlled trial of biofeedback, sham feedback, and standard therapy for dyssynergic defecation. Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 5(3):331–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Vrees MD, Weiss EG (2005) The evaluation of constipation. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 18(2):65–75

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Hill SS, Davids JS (2019) Surgical Evaluation and Management of Constipation. Dis Colon Rectum. 62(6):661–664

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Gallo G, Martellucci J, Pellino G, et al. (2018) Consensus Statement of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR): management and treatment of complete rectal prolapse. Tech Coloproctol. 22(12):919–931

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Varma M, Rafferty J, Buie WD, Standards Practice Task Force of American Society of C, Rectal S. Practice parameters for the management of rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54(11):1339-46.

  83. van der Schans EM, Paulides TJC, Wijffels NA, Consten ECJ (2018) Management of patients with rectal prolapse: the 2017 Dutch guidelines. Tech Coloproctol. 22(8):589–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Felt-Bersma RJ, Tiersma ES, Cuesta MA. Rectal prolapse, rectal intussusception, rectocele, solitary rectal ulcer syndrome, and enterocele. Gastroenterology clinics of North America. 2008;37(3):645-68, ix.

  85. Tsiaoussis J, Chrysos E, Glynos M, Vassilakis JS, Xynos E (1998) Pathophysiology and treatment of anterior rectal mucosal prolapse syndrome. Br J Surg. 85(12):1699–1702

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Aoki Y, Brown HW, Brubaker L, et al. (2017) Urinary incontinence in women. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 3:17042

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Artibani W, Cerruto MA (2005) The role of imaging in urinary incontinence. BJU Int. 95(5):699–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Sharma N, Chakrabarti S (2018) Clinical Evaluation of Urinary Incontinence. J Midlife Health. 9(2):55–64

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Murray S, Haverkorn RM, Koch YK, Lemack GE, Zimmern PE (2011) Urethral distortion after placement of synthetic mid urethral sling. J Urol. 185(4):1321–1326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Boyadzhyan L, Raman SS, Raz S. Role of static and dynamic MR imaging in surgical pelvic floor dysfunction. Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. 2008;28(4):949-67.

  91. Wu YM, Welk B (2019) Revisiting current treatment options for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse: a contemporary literature review. Res Rep Urol. 11:179–188

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Marks BK, Goldman HB. Videourodynamics: indications and technique. Urol Clin North Am. 2014;41(3):383-91, vii-viii.

  93. Winters JC, Dmochowski RR, Goldman HB, et al. (2012) Urodynamic studies in adults: AUA/SUFU guideline. J Urol. 188(6 Suppl):2464–2472

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Woodfield CA, Krishnamoorthy S, Hampton BS, Brody JM (2010) Imaging pelvic floor disorders: trend toward comprehensive MRI. AJR American journal of roentgenology. 194(6):1640–1649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Macura KJ, Genadry RR (2008) Female urinary incontinence: pathophysiology, methods of evaluation and role of MR imaging. Abdominal imaging. 33(3):371–380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Haliloglu B, Karateke A, Coksuer H, Peker H, Cam C (2010) The role of urethral hypermobility and intrinsic sphincteric deficiency on the outcome of transobturator tape procedure: a prospective study with 2-year follow-up. Int Urogynecol J. 21(2):173–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Karateke A, Haliloglu B, Cam C, Sakalli M. Comparison of TVT and TVT-O in patients with stress urinary incontinence: short-term cure rates and factors influencing the outcome. A prospective randomised study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;49(1):99-105.

  98. Macura KJ, Genadry RR, Bluemke DA. MR imaging of the female urethra and supporting ligaments in assessment of urinary incontinence: spectrum of abnormalities. Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. 2006;26(4):1135-49.

  99. Chamie LP, Ribeiro D, Caiado AHM, Warmbrand G, Serafini PC. Translabial US and Dynamic MR Imaging of the Pelvic Floor: Normal Anatomy and Dysfunction. Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. 2018;38(1):287-308.

  100. Inas A. Azab MAN, Ahmad M. Ibrahim. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging; reliability of assessment and correlation with clinical findings of pelvic organ prolapse. The Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. 2014;45(3):1003-10.

  101. Pregazzi R, Sartore A, Bortoli P, et al. (2002) Perineal ultrasound evaluation of urethral angle and bladder neck mobility in women with stress urinary incontinence. BJOG. 109(7):821–827

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Kelly CE (2004) Evaluation of voiding dysfunction and measurement of bladder volume. Rev Urol. 6(Suppl 1):S32–S37

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  103. Lewicky-Gaupp C, Blaivas J, Clark A, et al. (2009) “The cough game”: are there characteristic urethrovesical movement patterns associated with stress incontinence? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 20(2):171–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Ulmsten U, Petros P (1995) Intravaginal slingplasty (IVS): an ambulatory surgical procedure for treatment of female urinary incontinence. Scandinavian journal of urology and nephrology. 29(1):75–82

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Lee D, Bacsu C, Zimmern PE (2015) Meshology: a fast-growing field involving mesh and/or tape removal procedures and their outcomes. Expert Rev Med Devices. 12(2):201–216

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Shakir NA, Wang C, Singla N, et al. (2018) Challenges of Multidimensional Outcome Reporting after Suburethral Mid Urethral Sling Removal. J Urol. 199(6):1577–1583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Feng TS, Thum DJ, Anger JT, Eilber KS (2016) Sacral Osteomyelitis After Robotic Sacrocolpopexy. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 22(1):e6–e7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Staack A, Vitale J, Ragavendra N, Rodriguez LV (2014) Translabial ultrasonography for evaluation of synthetic mesh in the vagina. Urology. 83(1):68–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Viragh KA, Cohen SA, Shen L, et al. (2018) Translabial US: Preoperative Detection of Midurethral Sling Erosion in Stress Urinary Incontinence. Radiology. 289(3):721–727

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Denson L, Shobeiri SA (2014) Three-dimensional endovaginal sonography of synthetic implanted materials in the female pelvic floor. Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. 33(3):521–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SAR DFP, Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, The Bronx, USA

    Victoria Chernyak & Mariya Kobi

  2. Department of Colorectal Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Rockville, MD, USA

    Joshua Bleier

  3. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, USA

    Ian Paquette

  4. SAR DFP, Department of Radiology, Westchester Medical Center (Valhalla, NY), Valhalla, USA

    Milana Flusberg

  5. AUA, Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA

    Philippe Zimmern

  6. AUA, Departments of Urology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Larissa V. Rodriguez

  7. SAR DFP, Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, USA

    Phyllis Glanc

  8. SAR DFP, Department of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA

    Suzanne Palmer

  9. Walter National Military Medical Center (WRNMMC), Department of Surgery and National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Prevention (DCP), Gastrointestinal & Other Cancers Research Group, SSO and AACR, Bethesda, USA

    Luz Maria Rodriguez

  10. University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

    Marsha K. Guess

  11. Massachusetts General Hospital Pelvic Floor Disorders Center, Boston, MA, USA

    Milena M. Weinstein

  12. Department of Radiology, SAR DFP, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, USA

    Roopa Ram & Kedar Jambhekar

  13. Department of Radiology, SAR DFP, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, USA

    Gaurav Khatri

Authors
  1. Victoria Chernyak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joshua Bleier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mariya Kobi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ian Paquette
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Milana Flusberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Philippe Zimmern
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Larissa V. Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Phyllis Glanc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Suzanne Palmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Luz Maria Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Marsha K. Guess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Milena M. Weinstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Roopa Ram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Kedar Jambhekar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Gaurav Khatri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Victoria Chernyak.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chernyak, V., Bleier, J., Kobi, M. et al. Clinical applications of pelvic floor imaging: opinion statement endorsed by the society of abdominal radiology (SAR), American Urological Association (AUA), and American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS). Abdom Radiol 46, 1451–1464 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03017-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03017-8

Search

Navigation