Objectives: It is unknown whether diagnosing uterine prolapse (UP) via ultrasound or surgical criteria is superior. Our objective is to determine whether the diagnostic capacity of ultrasound with surgical criteria differs from that of surgical criteria only.
Methods: This was a multicenter prospective observational study with 54 premenopausal patients with surgical criteria for a dysfunctional pelvic floor pathology who were consecutively recruited for 1 year. Clinical UP with surgical criteria was defined when UP stage II-IV was identified (during pelvic floor consultation), and UP diagnosed by ultrasound with surgical criteria was established when a difference ≥15 mm was found between rest and Valsalva applied to the pubis-uterine fundus. The sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were determined to evaluate clinical and ultrasound methodologies as diagnostic tests.
Results: UP diagnosed by ultrasound with surgical criteria presented better sensitivity (78.57 vs 35.71%), specificity (92.11 vs 81.58%), positive predictive value (61.83 vs 23.99%), and negative predictive value (96.35 vs 11.37%) than UP diagnosed by surgical criteria only.
Conclusion: Ultrasound with surgical criteria is superior to surgical criteria alone when diagnosing UP.
Keywords: 3D transperineal ultrasound; pelvic floor; pelvic organ prolapse; uterine prolapse.
© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.