Current Urology Reports

, 19:9 | Cite as

Modern Theories of Pelvic Floor Support

A Topical Review of Modern Studies on Structural and Functional Pelvic Floor Support from Medical Imaging, Computational Modeling, and Electromyographic Perspectives
  • Yun Peng
  • Brandi D. Miller
  • Timothy B. Boone
  • Yingchun Zhang
Female Urology (L Cox, Section Editor)
  • 44 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Female Urology

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Weakened pelvic floor support is believed to be the main cause of various pelvic floor disorders. Modern theories of pelvic floor support stress on the structural and functional integrity of multiple structures and their interplay to maintain normal pelvic floor functions. Connective tissues provide passive pelvic floor support while pelvic floor muscles provide active support through voluntary contraction. Advanced modern medical technologies allow us to comprehensively and thoroughly evaluate the interaction of supporting structures and assess both active and passive support functions. The pathophysiology of various pelvic floor disorders associated with pelvic floor weakness is now under scrutiny from the combination of (1) morphological, (2) dynamic (through computational modeling), and (3) neurophysiological perspectives. This topical review aims to update newly emerged studies assessing pelvic floor support function among these three categories.

Recent Findings

A literature search was performed with emphasis on (1) medical imaging studies that assess pelvic floor muscle architecture, (2) subject-specific computational modeling studies that address new topics such as modeling muscle contractions, and (3) pelvic floor neurophysiology studies that report novel devices or findings such as high-density surface electromyography techniques. We found that recent computational modeling studies are featured with more realistic soft tissue constitutive models (e.g., active muscle contraction) as well as an increasing interest in simulating surgical interventions (e.g., artificial sphincter). Diffusion tensor imaging provides a useful non-invasive tool to characterize pelvic floor muscles at the microstructural level, which can be potentially used to improve the accuracy of the simulation of muscle contraction. Studies using high-density surface electromyography anal and vaginal probes on large patient cohorts have been recently reported. Influences of vaginal delivery on the distribution of innervation zones of pelvic floor muscles are clarified, providing useful guidance for a better protection of women during delivery.

Summary

We are now in a period of transition to advanced diagnostic and predictive pelvic floor medicine. Our findings highlight the application of diffusion tensor imaging, computational models with consideration of active pelvic floor muscle contraction, high-density surface electromyography, and their potential integration, as tools to push the boundary of our knowledge in pelvic floor support and better shape current clinical practice.

Keywords

Pelvic floor support Biomechanics Finite element method Electromyography 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Yun Peng, Brandi D. Miller, Timothy B. Boone, and Yingchun Zhang each declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Nygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL, Kenton K, Meikle S, Schaffer J, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA. 2008;300(11):1311–6.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.300.11.1311.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kepenekci I, Keskinkilic B, Akinsu F, Cakir P, Elhan AH, Erkek AB, et al. Prevalence of pelvic floor disorders in the female population and the impact of age, mode of delivery, and parity. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54(1):85–94.  https://doi.org/10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181fd2356.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wu JM, Kawasaki A, Hundley AF, Dieter AA, Myers ER, Sung VW. Predicting the number of women who will undergo incontinence and prolapse surgery, 2010 to 2050. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(3):230. e1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sung VW, Washington B, Raker CA. Costs of ambulatory care related to female pelvic floor disorders in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(5):483. e1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bergström BS. Urethral hanging theory. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(3):826–7.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.23018.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.••
    Hoyte L, Damaser M. Biomechanics of the female pelvic floor. Academic Press; 2016. This book provides an overview of pelvic floor anatomy, pathology, basic concepts of pelvic floor biomechanics and a review of previous work. Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tansatit T, Apinuntrum P, Phetudom T, Phanchart P. New insights into the pelvic organ support framework. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;166(2):221–5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.10.038.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    DeLancey JO. Structural support of the urethra as it relates to stress urinary incontinence: the hammock hypothesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;170(5):1713–23.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(12)91840-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Petros PEP, Ulmsten UI. An integral theory of female urinary incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1990;69(S153):7–31.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.1990.tb08027.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.••
    Lamblin G, Delorme E, Cosson M, Rubod C. Cystocele and functional anatomy of the pelvic floor: review and update of the various theories. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(9):1297–305. This recent review article provides a thorough summary of key anatomical structures and evaluated their roles in DeLancey’s and Petro’s theories. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dietz HP. Pelvic floor ultrasound: a review. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;60(1):58–81.  https://doi.org/10.1097/grf.0000000000000264.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kearney R, Miller JM, DeLancey JO. Interrater reliability and physical examination of the pubovisceral portion of the levator ani muscle, validity comparisons using MR imaging. Neurourol Urodyn. 2006;25(1):50–4.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20181.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.•
    Ahmad AN, Hainsworth A, Williams AB, Schizas AM. A review of functional pelvic floor imaging modalities and their effectiveness. Clin imaging. 2015;39(4):559–65. This review compares the utility of three pelvic floor imaging modalities: ultrasound imaging, magnetic resonance imaging, and dynamic defecating proctography. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DeLancey JO, Morgan DM, Fenner DE, Kearney R, Guire K, Miller JM, et al. Comparison of levator ani muscle defects and function in women with and without pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(2, Part 1):295–302.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000250901.57095.ba.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    JO DL, Kearney R, Chou Q, Speights S, Binno S. The appearance of levator ani muscle abnormalities in magnetic resonance images after vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101(1):46.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luo J, Larson KA, Fenner DE, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. Posterior vaginal prolapse shape and position changes at maximal Valsalva seen in 3-D MRI-based models. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(9):1301–6.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1760-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Larson KA, Luo J, Guire KE, Chen L, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. 3D analysis of cystoceles using magnetic resonance imaging assessing midline, paravaginal, and apical defects. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(3):285–93.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-011-1586-x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.•
    Sammarco AG, Nandikanti L, Kobernik EK, Xie B, Jankowski A, Swenson CW et al. Interactions among pelvic organ protrusion, levator ani descent, and hiatal enlargement in women with and without prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017. This MR imaging study compares the dynamic pelvic floor morphology between women with and without prolapse and identifies key features that are associated with prolapse. Google Scholar
  19. 19.•
    Pontbriand-Drolet S, Tang A, Madill SJ, Tannenbaum C, Lemieux MC, Corcos J, et al. Differences in pelvic floor morphology between continent, stress urinary incontinent, and mixed urinary incontinent elderly women: an MRI study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(4):515–21. This article highlighted the difference of morphological defects at rest between women with SUI and MUI symptoms and calls for special consideration during surgical intervention. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alapati S, Jambhekar K, editors. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvic floor. Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI; 2017: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pizzoferrato A-C, Timoh KN, Fritel X, Zareski E, Bader G, Fauconnier A. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging and pelvic floor disorders: how and when? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;181:259–66.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.07.025.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.•
    Zijta FM, Froeling M, Nederveen AJ, Stoker J. Diffusion tensor imaging and fiber tractography for the visualization of the female pelvic floor. Clin Anat. 2013;26(1):110–4. This review discusses the current state of diffusion tensor imaging and tractography in the evalatuion of female pelvic floor. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zijta F, Froeling M, Van Der Paardt M, Lakeman M, Bipat S, van Swijndregt AM, et al. Feasibility of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) with fibre tractography of the normal female pelvic floor. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(6):1243–9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-2044-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.••
    Betschart C, Kim J, Miller JM, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. Comparison of muscle fiber directions between different levator ani muscle subdivisions: in vivo MRI measurements in women. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(9):1263–8. In this article, the normal pudendal nerve anatomy and its variations are discussed and abnormal appearances of the pudendal nerve and its branches are illustrated and highlighted. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wadhwa V, Hamid AS, Kumar Y, Scott KM, Chhabra A. Pudendal nerve and branch neuropathy: magnetic resonance neurography evaluation. Acta Radiol. 2017;58(6):726–33.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185116668213.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zaraiskaya T, Kumbhare D, Noseworthy MD. Diffusion tensor imaging in evaluation of human skeletal muscle injury. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;24(2):402–8.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.20651.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.•
    Brandão S, Parente M, Silva E, Da Roza T, Mascarenhas T, Leitão J, et al. Pubovisceralis muscle fiber architecture determination: comparison between biomechanical modeling and diffusion tensor imaging. Ann Biomed Eng. 2017;45(5):1255–65. This article compares the pelvic floor muscle fiber directions between biomechanical modeling and diffusion tensor imaging methods, providing ground to the application of muscle fiber orientation in computer models. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.••
    Easley DC, Abramowitch SD, Moalli PA. Female pelvic floor biomechanics: bridging the gap. Curr Opin Urol. 2017;27(3):262–7. This topical review highlights recent contributions in mechanical testing and computational modeling to understand the pelvic floor biomechanics. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen L, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. A 3D finite element model of anterior vaginal wall support to evaluate mechanisms underlying cystocele formation. J Biomech. 2009;42(10):1371–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.04.043.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Noakes KF, Bissett IP, Pullan AJ, Cheng LK. Anatomically realistic three-dimensional meshes of the pelvic floor & anal canal for finite element analysis. Ann Biomed Eng. 2008;36(6):1060–71.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-008-9471-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang Y, Kim S, Erdman AG, Roberts KP, Timm GW. Feasibility of using a computer modeling approach to study SUI induced by landing a jump. Ann Biomed Eng. 2009;37(7):1425–33.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-009-9705-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Martins J, Pato M, Pires E, Jorge RN, Parente M, Mascarenhas T. Finite element studies of the deformation of the pelvic floor. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007;1101(1):316–34.  https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1389.019.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chen Z-W, Joli P, Feng Z-Q, Rahim M, Pirró N, Bellemare M-E. Female patient-specific finite element modeling of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). J Biomech. 2015;48(2):238–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.11.039.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jing D, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. A subject-specific anisotropic visco-hyperelastic finite element model of female pelvic floor stress and strain during the second stage of labor. J Biomech. 2012;45(3):455–60.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.12.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vila Pouca M, Ferreira J, Oliveira D, Parente M, Natal Jorge R. Viscous effects in pelvic floor muscles during childbirth: a numerical study. Int J Numer Methods in Biomed Eng. 2017. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/cnm.2927.
  36. 36.••
    Brandão S, Parente M, Mascarenhas T, da Silva ARG, Ramos I, Jorge RN. Biomechanical study on the bladder neck and urethral positions: simulation of impairment of the pelvic ligaments. J Biomech. 2015;48(2):217–23. This finite element modeling study assesses the bladder neck position under different degrees of pelvic floor ligament impairment. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.••
    Luo J, Chen L, Fenner DE, Ashton-Miller JA, DeLancey JO. A multi-compartment 3-D finite element model of rectocele and its interaction with cystocele. J Biomech. 2015;48(9):1580–6. This finite element modeling study evaluated the impact of particular impairments of the anterior and posterior pelvic compartment structural support systems on the development of cystocele and rectocele. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.••
    Peng Y, Khavari R, Nakib NA, Boone TB, Zhang Y. Assessment of urethral support using MRI-derived computational modeling of the female pelvis. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(2):205–12. This finite element modeling study evaluates the individual contributions of muscle groups in providing urethral support during Valsalva maneuver. The model contains a most complete pelvic floor anatomy. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Spirka T, Kenton K, Brubaker L, Damaser MS. Effect of material properties on predicted vesical pressure during a cough in a simplified computational model of the bladder and urethra. Ann Biomed Eng. 2013;41(1):185–94.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-012-0637-x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.•
    Peng Y, Neshatian L, Khavari R, Boone T, Zhang Y. PD01–12 a fluid-structure interaction simulation of fecal incontinence. J Urol. 2016;195(4):e50. This study introduces a realistic fluid-structure interaction model, namely the smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH), to simulate the motion of the stool to understand the interaction between sphincters and stools. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.••
    Oliveira DA, Parente MP, Calvo B, Mascarenhas T, Jorge RMN. A biomechanical analysis on the impact of episiotomy during childbirth. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2016;15(6):1523–34. This article explored how the episiotomy procedure impacts the pelvic floor during simulated childbirth using a finite element model. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Oliveira DA, Parente MP, Calvo B, Mascarenhas T, Jorge RMN. The management of episiotomy technique and its effect on pelvic floor muscles during a malposition childbirth. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. 2017;20(11):1249–59.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2017.1349762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dias N, Peng Y, Khavari R, Nakib NA, Sweet RM, Timm GW, et al. Pelvic floor dynamics during high-impact athletic activities: a computational modeling study. Clin Biomech. 2017;41:20–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2016.11.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Da Roza T, Brandão S, Oliveira D, Mascarenhas T, Parente M, Duarte JA, et al. Football practice and urinary incontinence: relation between morphology, function and biomechanics. J Biomech. 2015;48(9):1587–92.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.03.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Chen L, Ashton-Miller JA, Hsu Y, DeLancey J. Interaction among apical support, levator ani impairment, and anterior vaginal wall prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(2):324–32.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000227786.69257.a8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.•
    Todros S, Pavan P, Natali A. Biomechanical properties of synthetic surgical meshes for pelvic prolapse repair. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016;55:271–85. This review provides a comprehensive summary of mechanical properties of current synthetic surgical meshes for prolapse and relevant computational modelling studies. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.•
    Barone WR, Moalli PA, Abramowitch SD. Textile properties of synthetic prolapse mesh in response to uniaxial loading. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(3):326. e1–9. This study investigates the effect of tensile loading and pore orientation on mesh porosity and pore dimension and provides useful guidance towards a better mesh design and improved surgical techniques. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.••
    Liang R, Knight K, Abramowitch S, Moalli PA. Exploring the basic science of prolapse meshes. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;28(5):413. This review article provides an update of current understanding of the impact of mesh texile properties and mechanical behavior on vaginal structure, function and immune responses. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.••
    Jallah Z, Liang R, Feola A, Barone W, Palcsey S, Abramowitch S, et al. The impact of prolapse mesh on vaginal smooth muscle structure and function. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;123(7):1076–85. This animal study (Macaques) investigates the impact of prolapse mesh properties on the strucutre and function of vaginal smooth muscles. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Barone WR, Amini R, Maiti S, Moalli PA, Abramowitch SD. The impact of boundary conditions on surface curvature of polypropylene mesh in response to uniaxial loading. J Biomech. 2015;48(9):1566–74.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.02.061.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.•
    Peng Y, Khavari R, Nakib NA, Stewart JN, Boone TB, Zhang Y. The single-incision sling to treat female stress urinary incontinence: a dynamic computational study of outcomes and risk factors. J Biomech Eng. 2015;137(9):091007. This is the first finite element modeling study to implement a sub-urethral sling in the pelvic floor region. Optimal sling implantation location was recommended based on simulation results that minimized the retention force and maximized the recovery of natural urethral mobility. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Brandão S, Parente M, Da Roza TH, Silva E, Ramos IM, Mascarenhas T, et al. On the stiffness of the mesh and urethral mobility: a finite element analysis. J Biomech Eng. 2017;139(8):081002.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4036606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Dias N, Peng Y, Miles B, Khavari R, MacDonnell V, Boone T, et al. PD49-07 urethral mobility study with a computational model of the male pelvis. J Urol. 2016;195((4):e1182-e3.Google Scholar
  54. 54.••
    Natali AN, Carniel EL, Fontanella CG, Todros S, De Benedictis GM, Cerruto MA, et al. Urethral lumen occlusion by artificial sphincteric devices: a computational biomechanics approach. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2017:1–8. This finite element modeling study pioneers the computational modeling of artificial sphincter devices. Google Scholar
  55. 55.••
    Brandão FSQDS, Parente MPL, Rocha PAGG, Saraiva MTDQECDM, Ramos IMAP, Natal Jorge RM. Modeling the contraction of the pelvic floor muscles. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. 2016;19(4):347–56. This is the first finite element modeling study that considers active pelvic floor muscle contractions by including an active term in the constitutive model of muscle tissues. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Stokes WE, Jayne DG, Alazmani A, Culmer PR, editors. A physical simulation to investigate the effect of anorectal angle on continence. Biomedical Engineering (BioMed), 2017 13th IASTED International Conference on; IEEE; 2017.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Mellgren A, Zutshi M, Lucente VR, Culligan P, Fenner DE, Group TS. A posterior anal sling for fecal incontinence: results of a 152-patient prospective multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(3):349. e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Grape HH, Dedering Å, Jonasson AF. Retest reliability of surface electromyography on the pelvic floor muscles. Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28(5):395–9.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20648.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Auchincloss CC, McLean L. The reliability of surface EMG recorded from the pelvic floor muscles. J Neurosci Methods. 2009;182(1):85–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2009.05.027.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Koenig I, Luginbuehl H, Radlinger L. Reliability of pelvic floor muscle electromyography tested on healthy women and women with pelvic floor muscle dysfunction. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2017;60(6):382–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2017.04.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Botelho S, Pereira LC, Marques J, Lanza AH, Amorim CF, Palma P, et al. Is there correlation between electromyography and digital palpation as means of measuring pelvic floor muscle contractility in nulliparous, pregnant, and postpartum women? Neurourol Urodyn. 2013;32(5):420–3.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.22321.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Botelho S, Riccetto C, Herrmann V, Pereira LC, Amorim C, Palma P. Impact of delivery mode on electromyographic activity of pelvic floor: comparative prospective study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(7):1258–61.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20864.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Resende APM, Petricelli CD, Bernardes BT, Alexandre SM, Nakamura MU, Zanetti MRD. Electromyographic evaluation of pelvic floor muscles in pregnant and nonpregnant women. Int Urogynecol J. 2012;23(8):1041–5.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-012-1702-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bharucha AE, Dunivan G, Goode PS, Lukacz ES, Markland AD, Matthews CA, et al. Epidemiology, pathophysiology, and classification of fecal incontinence: state of the science summary for the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) workshop. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110(1):127–36.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2014.396.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Stafford RE, Sapsford R, Ashton-Miller J, Hodges PW. A novel transurethral surface electrode to record male striated urethral sphincter electromyographic activity. J Urol. 2010;183(1):378–85.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.08.105.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Stafford RE, Ashton-Miller JA, Sapsford R, Hodges PW. Activation of the striated urethral sphincter to maintain continence during dynamic tasks in healthy men. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31(1):36–43.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.21178.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.••
    Stafford RE, Ashton-Miller JA, Constantinou C, Coughlin G, Lutton NJ, Hodges PW. Pattern of activation of pelvic floor muscles in men differs with verbal instructions. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(4):457–63. This series of studies describes the pioneering application of transurethral surface EMG electrode to record the electromyography of male urethral sphincters. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Drost G, Stegeman DF, van Engelen BG, Zwarts MJ. Clinical applications of high-density surface EMG: a systematic review. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2006;16(6):586–602.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.09.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Merletti R, Bottin A, Cescon C, Farina D, Gazzoni M, Martina S, et al. Multichannel surface EMG for the non-invasive assessment of the anal sphincter muscle. Digestion. 2004;69(2):112–22.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000077877.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Enck P, Franz H, Azpiroz F, Fernandez-Fraga X, Hinninghofen H, Kaske-Bretag K, et al. Innervation zones of the external anal sphincter in healthy male and female subjects. Digestion. 2004;69(2):123–30.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000077878.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Wietek BM, Hinninghofen H, Jehle EC, Enck P, Franz HB. Asymmetric sphincter innervation is associated with fecal incontinence after anal sphincter trauma during childbirth. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26(1):134–9.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20307.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.••
    Cescon C, Riva D, Začesta V, Drusany-Starič K, Martsidis K, Protsepko O, et al. Effect of vaginal delivery on the external anal sphincter muscle innervation pattern evaluated by multichannel surface EMG: results of the multicentre study TASI-2. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(11):1491–9. This article summarizes the findings of a large multicenter study. The distribution of innervation zones was analyzed and compared before (511 prepartum women) and after (331 returned postpartum) delivery. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.••
    Cescon C, Raimondi EE, Začesta V, Drusany-Starič K, Martsidis K, Merletti R. Characterization of the motor units of the external anal sphincter in pregnant women with multichannel surface EMG. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(8):1097–103. In this article, the motor unit properties of the external anal sphincter during voluntary contraction were investigated in 478 pregnant women. The identified innervation zone distribution provided important pre-planning parameters for episiotomy. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Cescon C, Mesin L, Nowakowski M, Merletti R. Geometry assessment of anal sphincter muscle based on monopolar multichannel surface EMG signals. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2011;21(2):394–401.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2010.11.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Enck P, Franz H, Davico E, Mastrangelo F, Mesin L, Merletti R. Repeatability of innervation zone identification in the external anal sphincter muscle. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(3):449–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Cescon C, Bottin A, Fraga XLF, Azpiroz F, Merletti R. Detection of individual motor units of the puborectalis muscle by non-invasive EMG electrode arrays. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2008;18(3):382–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.11.007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Ullah K, Cescon C, Afsharipour B, Merletti R. Automatic detection of motor unit innervation zones of the external anal sphincter by multichannel surface EMG. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2014;24(6):860–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2014.05.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Enck P, Hinninghofen H, Merletti R, Azpiroz F. The external anal sphincter and the role of surface electromyography. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2005;17(s1):60–7.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2982.2005.00660.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Sagi-Dain L, Sagi S. The correct episiotomy: does it exist? A cross-sectional survey of four public Israeli hospitals and review of the literature. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(8):1213–9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2680-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Merletti R, Riva D, Cescon C, Zacesta V. The correct episiotomy: does it exist? Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(1):161–2.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2879-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.•
    Voorham-van der Zalm PJ, Voorham JC, van den Bos TW, Ouwerkerk TJ, Putter H, Wasser MN, et al. Reliability and differentiation of pelvic floor muscle electromyography measurements in healthy volunteers using a new device: the Multiple Array Probe Leiden (MAPLe). Neurourol Urodyn. 2013;32(4):341–8. This study describes a multi-channel EMG probe and its application in differentiation of EMG signals from a large group of healthy subjects (N=229). CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.••
    Heesakkers J, Gerretsen R, Izeta A, Sievert KD, Farag F. Circumferential urinary sphincter surface electromyography: a novel diagnostic method for intrinsic sphincter deficiency. Neurourol Urodyn. 2016;35(2):186–91. This article describes the pioneering effort to apply a high-density surface EMG array to record the EMG activities from urinary sphincter muscles. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.•
    Peng Y, He J, Khavari R, Boone TB, Zhang Y. Functional mapping of the pelvic floor and sphincter muscles from high-density surface EMG recordings. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(11):1689–96. This study describes the application of new intravaginal and intrarectal high-density surface EMG probes in detecting motor unit properties of multiple pelvic floor muscles. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Peng Y, He J, Yao B, Li S, Zhou P, Zhang Y. Motor unit number estimation based on high-density surface electromyography decomposition. Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;127(9):3059–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2016.06.014.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Holobar A, Zazula D, editors. Gradient convolution kernel compensation applied to surface electromyograms. International Conference on Independent Component Analysis and Signal Separation: Springer; 2007.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Liu Y, Ning Y, Li S, Zhou P, Rymer WZ, Zhang Y. Three-dimensional innervation zone imaging from multi-channel surface EMG recordings. Int J Neural Syst. 2015;25(06):1550024.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129065715500240.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Zhang C, Peng Y, Liu Y, Li S, Zhou P, Rymer WZ, et al. Imaging three-dimensional innervation zone distribution in muscles from M-wave recordings. J Neural Eng. 2017;14(3):036011.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/aa65dd.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.•
    Flury N, Koenig I, Radlinger L. Crosstalk considerations in studies evaluating pelvic floor muscles using surface electromyography in women: a scoping review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017:1–11. This review article highlights the topic concerning the problem of crosstalk in pelvic floor surface EMG studies. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yun Peng
    • 1
  • Brandi D. Miller
    • 2
  • Timothy B. Boone
    • 2
  • Yingchun Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical Engineering, Cullen College of EngineeringUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Department of UrologyHouston Methodist HospitalHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations