Objective:-This study aims to ascertain the role of MR Defecography in the evaluation of obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) with objective to describe spectrum of MR Defecography findings in obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) and describe a number of reference lines and measurement points used to diagnose and grade pelvic floor disorders and Document the MRI appearance of disorders associated with ano-rectal dysfunction. MR Defecography demonstrated the profile of obstructed defecation syndrome on the basis of MR defecography and demonstrate its utility in simultaneous & objective evaluation of all three pelvic compartments. This diagnostic modalities provide a detailed pelvic floor anatomy and functional evaluation, as well as their respective abnormalities, making a precise diagnosis and provides valuable information on treatment planning & decrease chance of postoperative recurrence.
Subjects and Methods: It was Cross-sectional and prospective (quantitative) hospital based descriptive type of observational study carried out at a tertiary hospital SMS hospital, jaipur. Chosen the patients diagnosed with ODS as per Rome criteria (III) whose colonoscopy or rectosigmoidoscopy, had been done to rule out other findings from Feb 2018 to September 2019.MR defecography (static and dynamic) with 3 T (PHILIPS INGENIA) MRI system having tunnel configuration. After written and informed consent, patient was positioned supine in MR machine gantry . Static imaging performed in the axial T1WI high resolution, axial, coronal and sagittal T2WI high resolution images at rest for anatomical evaluation. Following this,after ultrasound gel instilled in the patient’s rectum and intravaginaly ,dynamic imaging were taken in the midsagittal plane through the anal canal using a T2 weighted sequence. This sequence was ran for almost 2 min, while the patient performs various maneuvers (Kegel (squeeze), valsalva menuvere (strain), and defecation). MR defecography structurally and functionally evaluated in all 3 pelvic floor compartments and associated defects noted and grading of specific findings like organ specific prolapse, pelvic floor relaxiation and descent were measured.
Results: In our study most common findings were pelvic floor descent and anorectal junction descent in 92.68% cases each followed by rectocele in 82.93% cases. Among the females, vaginal/uterine prolapse were observed in 65.31% cases. Least common findings were paradoxical contraction (8.54%) and sigmoidocele (0%). Significant difference was observed in MRI functional parameters in resting state and during defecation/maximal strain position, utilising HMO system for pelvic floor relaxation and descent, as significant difference (p <0.001S) was observed in all parameters including H line, M line, bladder base descent, cervical/vaginal and anorectal junction descent during resting state and during defecation/maximal strain position. Out of 82 conservative biofeedback therapy was given to 79.27 % patients, surgical management was done in (7.32%) and combination of both therapies was given in 13.41% of cases. Out of 82 patients 68.29% showed benefit from management and showed improvement on follow and 31.71% patients were not improved on follow up.
Conclusion: As complete survey of the entire pelvis is necessary before surgical repair Magnetic resonance imaging permits evaluation of all three pelvic compartments and as we demonstrated in our study more than one compartment are frequently affected in obstructed defecation syndrome. Static MR Imaging can be also useful to identify the defects responsible for pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence, and so help perform site specific repair in surgery, to avoid the high recurrence rates.Findings reported at dynamic MR imaging of the pelvic floor are valuable for selecting candidates for surgical treatment and for indicating the most appropriate surgical approach as detection rate of pathologies increased during defecation / maximal straning as concluded by our study.
MR Imaging in Diagnosis of Pelvic Floor Descent: Supine versus Sitting Position