Volume 202, Issue 5 , Pages 497.e1-497.e6, May 2010
Structural position of the posterior vagina and pelvic floor in women with and without posterior vaginal prolapse
Objective
The objective of the study was to compare pelvic structure location on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) during maximal Valsalva among women with posterior prolapse and those with normal support.
Study Design
Subjects (n = 37) had posterior vaginal wall (PVW) prolapse of +1 cm or greater. All underwent midsagittal, dynamic MRI. Structure locations (distal vagina, apex, perineal body, external anal sphincter) were determined. PVW length, levator and urogenital hiatus diameters, and prolapse diameter were measured.
Results
Subjects had more caudal structures (P < .001) and larger hiatus diameters (P < .005); the posterior wall was longer, whereas the straight-line distance between the apex and distal vagina was shorter. In enteroceles, the apex was more ventrally displaced compared with rectoceles (P = .003). Unlike apical descent (r = –0.3; P = .1), PVW length and point Bp were correlated with MRI prolapse size (r = 0.5; P = .002; r = 0.7; P < .001, respectively).
Conclusion
At maximal Valsalva on MRI, structures are more caudal in women with posterior prolapse. The posterior vaginal wall is longer; this length strongly correlates with prolapse size.
Key words: magnetic resonance imaging, posterior vaginal wall length, posterior vaginal wall prolapse
Cite this article as: Lewicky-Gaupp C, Yousuf A, Larson KA, et al. Structural position of the posterior vagina and pelvic floor in women with and without posterior vaginal prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;202:497.e1-6.
Reprints not available from the authors.
This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health through the Office for Research on Women's Health Specialized Center of Research on Sex and Gender Factors Affecting Women's Health and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 1 P50 Grants HD044406 and R01 HD 38665.
PII: S0002-9378(10)00002-5
doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.01.001
© 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc.
Volume 202, Issue 5 , Pages 497.e1-497.e6, May 2010

