Abstract
Endoanal ultrasonography has become an important tool in the evaluation of patients with anal incontinence. However, the extent of anterior defects is sometimes difficult to quantitate during endoanal ultrasonography. PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate perineal body measurement during endoanal ultrasonography in assessing patients with obstetric anal sphincter injuries. METHODS: Forty-two patients with anal incontinence because of obstetric sphincter injuries and 13 asymptomatic subjects were investigated with endoanal ultrasonography. Sphincter muscle thickness, sphincter defects, and perineal body were measured. Perineal body measurement was performed by inserting a finger, held gently against the posterior vaginal wall, into the vagina and measuring the distance between the inner surface of the internal sphincter and the ultrasonographic reflection of the finger. RESULTS: All patients had anterior sphincter lesions of varying extent. Mean size of internal sphincter lesions was 146°, and mean size of external sphincter lesions was 107° (P<0.001). Perineal body measurement was performed without difficulty in all patients and subjects. Perineal body measurement (mean ± standard deviation) was 6±2 mm in patients and 12±3 mm in asymptomatic subjects (P<0.001). Ninety-three percent of patients had perineal body measurement <-10 mm, and 70 percent of asymptomatic subjects had perineal body measurement >10 mm. Digital delineation of the perineal body during endoanal ultrasonography improved the visualization of sphincter lesions in 74 percent of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Digital delineation of the perineal body during endoanal ultrasonography improved the visualization of sphincter lesions in the majority of patients. Perineal body measurement is performed without difficulty and is a good predictor of anterior sphincter lesions. Use of this technique improves visualization of sphincter lesions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Leigh RJ, Turnberg LA. Faecal incontinence: the unvoiced symptom. Lancet 1982;1:1349–51.
Henry MM. Pathogenesis and management of fecal incontinence in the adult. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 1987;16:35–45.
Swash M. Faecal incontinence [Editorial]. BMJ 1993;307:636–7.
Fornell EK, Berg G, Hallbook O, Matthiesen LS, Sjodahl R. Clinical consequences of anal sphincter rupture during vaginal delivery. J Am Coll Surg 1996;183:553–8.
Haadem K, Dahlstrom JA, Ling L, Ohrlander S. Anal sphincter function after delivery rupture. Obstet Gynecol 1987;70:53–6.
Borgatta L, Piening SL, Cohen WR. Association of episiotomy and delivery position with deep perineal laceration during spontaneous delivery in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989;160:294–7.
Buekens P, Lagasse R, Dramaix M, Wollast E. Episiotomy and third-degree tears. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985;92:820–3.
Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Hudson CN, Bartram CI. Third degree obstetric anal sphincter tears: risk factors and outcome of primary repair. BMJ 1994;308:887–91.
Haadem K, Ohrlander S, Lingman G. Long-term ailments due to anal sphincter rupture caused by delivery—a hidden problem. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1988;27:27–32.
Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Hudson CN, Thomas JM, Bartram CI. Anal-sphincter disruption during vaginal delivery. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1905–11.
Deen KI, Kumar D, Williams JG, Olliff J, Keighley MR. Anal sphincter defects: correlation between endoanal ultrasound and surgery. Ann Surg 1993;218:201–5.
Felt-Bersma RJ, Cuesta MA, Koorevaar M. Anal sphincter repair improves anorectal function and endosonographic image: a prospective clinical study. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:878–85.
Meyenberger C, Bertschinger P, Zala GF, Buchmann P. Anal sphincter defects in fecal incontinence: correlation between endosonography and surgery. Endoscopy 1996;28:217–24.
Romano G, Rotondano G, Esposito P, Pellecchia L, Novi A. External anal sphincter defects: correlation between pre-operative anal endosonography and intraoperative findings. Br J Radiol 1996;69:6–9.
Burnett SJ, Spence Jones C, Speakman CT, Kamm MA, Hudson CN, Bartram CI. Unsuspected sphincter damage following childbirth revealed by anal endosonography. Br J Radiol 1991;64:225–7.
Sultan AH, Kamm MA, Hudson CN, Nicholls JR, Bartram CI. Endosonography of the anal sphincters: normal anatomy and comparison with manometry. Clin Radiol 1994;49:368–74.
Falk PM, Blatchford GJ, Cali RL, Christensen MA, Thorson AG. Transanal ultrasound and manometry in the evaluation of fecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:468–72.
Bartram CI. Anal endosonography in faecal incontinence [Editorial]. Endoscopy 1996;28:259–60.
Bartram CI, Burnett SJ. Atlas of anal endosonography. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1991.
Bartram CI, Sultan AH. Anal endosonography in faecal incontinence. Gut 1995;37:4–6.
Deen KI, Kumar D, Williams JG, Olliff J, Keighley MR. The prevalence of anal sphincter defects in faecal incontinence: a prospective endosonic study. Gut 1993;34:685–8.
Enck P, von Giesen HJ, Schafer A,et al. Comparison of anal sonography with conventional needle electromyography in the evaluation of anal sphincter defects. Am J Gastroenterol 1996;91:2539–43.
Rieger NA, Sweeney JL, Hoffmann DC, Young JF, Hunter A. Investigation of fecal incontinence with endoanal ultrasound. Dis Colon Rectum 1996;39:860–4.
Rieger NA, Downey PR, Wattchow DA. Short communication: endoanal ultrasound during contraction of the anal sphincter-improved definition and diagnostic accuracy. Br J Radiol 1996;69:665–7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, June 22 to 26, 1997.
About this article
Cite this article
Zetterström, J.P., Mellgren, A., Madoff, R.D. et al. Perineal body measurement improves evaluation of anterior sphincter lesions during endoanal ultrasonography. Dis Colon Rectum 41, 705–713 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02236256
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02236256