Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Diagnostik der Beckenbodeninsuffizienz

Sonographie und interdisziplinäre Indikationsstellung

Diagnostics of pelvic floor insufficiency

Sonography and interdisciplinary indications

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
coloproctology Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Die Beckenbodeninsuffizienz als Erkrankungsbild zeichnet sich durch mannigfaltige Symptome, wie z. B. Druckgefühl, Entleerungsstörungen oder Inkontinenzbeschwerden, aus. Bedingt durch die hohe Inzidenz und die breitgefächerte Symptomatik, befassen sich unterschiedliche medizinische Fachrichtungen, darunter Gynäkologie, Chirurgie, Koloproktologie und Urologie mit diesem Krankheitsbild. Alle diese Fachrichtungen haben im Laufe der Zeit verschiedene diagnostische Techniken hervorgebracht und bieten den Betroffenen zahlreiche konservative und operative Behandlungsstrategien. In der heutigen Zeit zeigt sich jedoch zunehmend, dass ein Behandlungsansatz, welcher nur auf einen Teil des Beckenbodens fokussiert, nicht mehr ausreicht, um dessen kombinierte Pathologien zu behandeln. In diesem Zusammenhang stellt die Diagnostik einen zentralen Punkt dar, da sie am Anfang eines jeden Behandlungspfades steht und keine Fehler zulässt. In diesem Beitrag werden die einzelnen fachspezifischen diagnostischen Tools beschrieben. Ein besonderes Augenmerk wird auf die Sonographie gelegt, die einige entscheidende Vorteile bei der Beurteilung des Beckenbodens bietet. Aktuell weichen die Messmethoden und die Einteilung der Schweregrade von Fakultät zu Fakultät ab. Daraus resultieren unterschiedliche und zum Teil gegensätzliche Behandlungsvorschläge. Durch eine alternative Messmethode können alle Beckenbodenveränderungen quantifiziert werden. Diese Methode kann fachübergreifend für die prä- und postoperative Beurteilung des gesamten Beckenbodens eingesetzt werden, was wiederum einer kontinuierlichen Verbesserung der Behandlung dient.

Abstract

Pelvic floor insufficiency as a disease is characterized by various symptoms, such as feeling of pressure, voiding disorders, or incontinence. Due to the high incidence and the wide range of symptoms, various medical specialties, including gynecology, surgery, coloproctology, and urology, have patients who present with this clinical picture. Each specialty has developed various diagnostic techniques over time and offer those affected numerous conservative and surgical treatment strategies. Today, however, it is becoming increasingly apparent that a treatment approach focused on part of the pelvic floor is no longer sufficient to treat the combined pathologies of the pelvic floor. In this context, diagnosis is a central point, as it is at the beginning of each treatment path and does not allow errors. This article describes the individual specialty-specific diagnostic tools. Particular attention is paid to sonography, which offers several decisive advantages in the assessment of the pelvic floor. Currently, the measurement methods and the classification of the severity levels differ from specialty to specialty, which results in different and sometimes contradictory treatment options. Using an alternative diagnostic approach can quantify all pelvic floor changes. This alternative approach can be used interdisciplinary for pre- and postoperative assessment of the entire pelvic floor, which in turn serves a continuous improvement of treatment.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5

Literatur

Verwendete Literatur

  1. Beer-Gabel M, Teshler M, Barzilai N et al (2002) Dynamic transperineal ultrasound in the diagnosis of pelvic floor disorders: pilot study. Dis Colon Rectum 45(2):239–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-6155-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Boyd SS, O’Sullivan D, Tulikangas P (2017) Use of the Pelvic Organ Quantification System (POP-Q) in published articles of peer-reviewed journals. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 28(11):1719–1723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chaudhry Z, Tarnay C (2016) Descending perineum syndrome: a review of the presentation, diagnosis, and management. Int Urogynecol J 27(8):1149–1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2889-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Maglinte DDT, Bartram CI, Hale DA, Park J, Kohli MD, Robb BW, Romano SJC (2011) Lappas functional imaging of the pelvic floor. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10092367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dietz HP (2011) Female pelvic floor dysfunction—an imaging perspective. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 9(2):113–121. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrgastro.2011.213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. EL-Gharib M (2018) Central and lateral Cystocele. Sci J Res Rev 1:1–3. https://doi.org/10.33552/SJRR.2018.01.000505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hainsworth AJ, Solanki D, Hamad A, Morris SJ, Schizas AM, Williams AB (2017) Integrated total pelvic floor ultrasound in pelvic floor defaecatory dysfunction. Colorectal Dis 19(1):O54–O65. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13568

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM et al (2010) An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J 21(1):5–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0976-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Iacobellis F, Brillantino A, Renzi A et al (2016) MR imaging in diagnosis of pelvic floor descent: supine versus sitting position. Gastroenterol Res Pract. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6594152

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Kowallik MJ, Prohm P, Kuruc T, Piłat J, Lo Nigro MC et al (2018) New technique for pelvic floor measurement—transperineal dynamic ultrasound measurement method to detection and quantification of rectocele, cystocele, enterocele and perineal descensus. J Med Stud Res 1:3. https://doi.org/10.24966/MSR-5657/100003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lermann J, Renner S, Winkler M, Müller A, Hildebrandt T, Boosz A, Beckmann M, Wischnik A, Pauli F (2010) Genitalvorfall: Symptomatik, Diagnostik und Therapie. Frauenheilkd Up2date 4:111–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Martellucci J, Brusciano L (2016) The dynamic transperineal ultrasound era of the evaluation of obstructed defecation syndrome. Dis Colon Rectum 59(8):800–803. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Abdulaziz M, Stothers L, Macnab A (2017) Effects of posture and gravity on pelvic organ prolapse (April 27 th 2017 Reviewed: April 6th 2018 Published: June 6th 2018 Open access peer-reviewed chapter)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Meirav Braverman MD et al (2018) Does patient posture affect the ultrasound evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse? J Ultrasound Med 38(1):233–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Murad-Regadas SM, Regadas Filho FS, Regadas FS et al (2014) Use of dynamic 3‑dimensional transvaginal and transrectal ultrasonography to assess posterior pelvic floor dysfunction related to obstructed defecation. Dis Colon Rectum 57(2):228–236. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Persu C, Chapple CR, Cauni V, Gutue S, Geavlete P (2011) Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q)—a new era in pelvic prolapse staging. J Med Life 4(1):75–81

    PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Pahwa AK, Siegelman ES, Arya LA (2015) Physical examination of the female internal and external genitalia with and without pelvic organ prolapse: a review. Clin Anat 28(3):305–313. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca. 22472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Santoro GA, Wieczorek AP, Stankiewicz A, Woźniak MM, Bogusiewicz M, Rechberger T (2009) High-resolution three-dimensional endovaginal ultrasonography in the assessment of pelvic floor anatomy: a preliminary study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 20(10):1213–1222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0928-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sentovich SM, Rivela LJ, Thorson AG, Christensen MA, Blatchford GJ (1995) Simultaneous dynamic proctography and peritoneography for pelvic floor disorders. Dis Colon Rectum 38(9):912–915. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02049724

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Silva AC, Maglinte DD (2013) Pelvic floor disorders: what’s the best test? Abdom Imaging 38(6):1391–1408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-013-0039-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Swamy N, Bajaj G, Olliphant SS et al (2020) Pelvic floor imaging with MR defecography: correlation with gynecologic pelvic organ prolapse quantification. Abdom Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02476-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Vellucci F, Regini C, Barbanti C, Luisi S (2018) Pelvic floor evaluation with transperineal ultrasound: a new approach. Minerva Ginecol 70(1):58–68. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4784.17.04121-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Xu CY, Ding SQ, Xue YH, Ding YJ (2013) Dynamic three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of pelvic floor dyssynergia. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi 16(5):429–433

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Gravante G, Giordano P (2008) The role of three-dimensional endoluminal ultrasound imaging in the evaluation of anorectal diseases: a review. Surg Endosc 22(7):1570–1578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9865-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Law PA, Danin JC, Lamb GM, Regan L, Darzi A, Gedroyc WM (2001) Dynamic imaging of the pelvic floor using an open-configuration magnetic resonance scanner. J Magn Reson Imaging 13(6):923–929

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Santoro Giulio A (2020) Beyond imagination: integrated imaging approach to pelvic floor disorders. Koloproktologia 19(1):8–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Kowallik.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

M. Kowallik gibt an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

figure qr

QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kowallik, M. Diagnostik der Beckenbodeninsuffizienz. coloproctology 43, 321–327 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00053-021-00551-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00053-021-00551-3

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation