Author/Editor		Sudol-Szopinska, Iwona; Szczepkowski, Marek; Panorska, Anna; Jakubowski, Wieslaw; Sarti, Dariusz
Title		Endosonography of the puborectalis muscle-interobserver comparison of the anal and vaginal ultrasonography
Translated title		Endoskopska ultrazvočna preiskava puborektalne mišice - primerjava izsledkov analne in vaginalne ultrazvočne preiskave dveh preiskovalcev
Type		članek
Source		Radiol Oncol
Vol. and No.		Letnik 36, št. 1
Publication year		2002
Volume		str. 23-31
Language		eng
Abstract		Background. The aim of this study was to compare the anal ultrasonography (AUS) and transvaginal ultrasonography (TVUS) and also the interobserver variability assessment in the above comparison of visualization and dynamic activity assessment of the puborectalis muscle (PR). Patients and methods. AUS and TVUS were performed in 25 women aged 20-72 years (median age 42). All examinations were performed by Bruel and Kjaer system, using a 7.0-MHz rotating endoprobe covered with a water filled hard cone. All women were examined by two operators and AUS and TVUS were performed in each case. Results. In 15 out of 25 women (60 %), a better definition of the PR was achieved in TVUS than in AUS. Both observers agreed with these findings. In the assessment of the PR function a discrepancy between the two methods and the two observers was found: in 4 women by both observers (16%) and in an additional 3 women by observer 1 (28 %). In all these cases, the PR function appeared to be better in TVUS than in AUS. Conclusions. AUS and TVUS enable assessment of the morphology and dynamic activity of the PR. In the majority of cases (60 %), the PR was better visualized by means of TVUS than in AUS. In the assessment of the PR function, both methods were inconsistent in 7 cases (28 ž) by the operator 1 and in 4 cases (16 %) by the operator 2. In all these cases, TVUS showed a better PR function than AUS. In 3 cases (12 %), we found the interobserver disagreement in the PR function assessment.
Summary		Izhodišča. Z raziskavo smo želeli primerjati rezultate analne in transvaginalne ultrazvočne preiskave. Primerjali smo tudi ocene različnih izvajalcev pri obeh preiskavah. Zanimala nas je različna vizualizacija kot tudi ocena dinamike puborektalne mišice. Bolniki in metode. Analno in transvaginalno ultrazvočno preiskavo smo opravili pri 25 bolnicah, starih od 20 do 72 let (povprečna starost 42 let). Pri vseh preiskavah smo uporabili naprave Bruel &Kjaer s 7,0 MHz vrtljivo sondo s trdo konico, napolnjeno z vodo. Vse bolnice sta pregledala dva preiskovalca z analno in transvaginalno preiskavo. Rezultati. Pri 15 (60%) od 25 bolnic je bila puborektalna mišica natančneje določena s transvaginalno preiskavo kot z analno. Oba preiskovalca sta se strinjala v tej ugotovitvi. Njuni zaključki pa so se razlikovali pri oceni funkcionalnosti puborektalne mišice pri obeh metodah raziskave: pri 4 bolnicah (16 %) sta oba preiskovalca ugotovila razlike med metodama (16 %), pri 3 pa le prvi preiskovalec (28 %). V vseh primerih sta funkcijo puborektalne mišice ocenila boljše s transvaginalno ultrazvočno preiskavo kot z analno. Zaključki. Z analno in transvaginalno ultrazvočno preiskavo ocenjujemo morfologijo in dinamično funkcionalnost puborektalne mišice. V večini primerov (60 %) je bila vizualizacija puborektalne mišice boljša pri transvaginalni metodi kot pri analni. Pri oceni funkcionalnosti puborektalne mišice so bili rezultati prvega preiskovalca pri obeh metodah protislovni v 7 primerih (28 %), rezultati drugega preiskovalca pa v 4 primerih (16 %). V vseh primerih pa je transvaginalna preiskava natančneje prikazala funkcionalnost puborektalne mišice kot analna metoda. V 3 primerih (12 %) smo med prvim in drugim preiskovalcem ugotovili razlike v njunih ocenah funkcionalnosti puborektalne mišice.
Descriptors		ANUS VAGINA MUSCLES