Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 3/2020

01-03-2020 | Original Article

Defining “normal recovery” of pelvic floor function and appearance in a high-risk vaginal delivery cohort

Authors: Pamela S. Fairchild, Lisa Kane Low, Katherine M. Kowalk, Giselle E. Kolenic, John O. DeLancey, Dee E. Fenner

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 3/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Childbirth pelvic floor trauma leads to pelvic floor disorders. Identification of significant injuries would facilitate intervention for recovery. Our objectives were to identify differences in pelvic floor appearance and function following delivery and patterns of normal recovery in women sustaining high-risk labor events.

Methods

We completed a prospective cohort study comparing women undergoing vaginal births involving risk factors for pelvic floor injury with women undergoing cesareans. Data were collected on multidimensional factors including levator ani muscle (LA) tears. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were used to compare the groups. We identified potential markers of pelvic floor injury based on effect size.

Results

Eighty-two women post-vaginal delivery and 30 women post-cesarean enrolled. The vaginal group had decreased perineal body length between early postpartum, 6 weeks (p < 0.001), and 6 months (p = 0.001). POP-Q points did not change between any time point (all p > 0.05). Measures of strength improved between each time point (all p < 0.002). When compared with cesarean delivery, women post-vaginal birth had longer genital hiatus and lower anterior and posterior vaginal walls (all p < 0.05). Based on theoretical considerations and effect sizes, those with Bp ≥0 cm, Kegel force ≤1.50 N, and/or an LA tear on imaging were considered to have significant pelvic floor injury. Using this definition, at 6 weeks, 27 (46.4%) women were classified as injured. At 6 months, 13 (29.6%) remained injured.

Conclusions

We propose that pelvic floor muscle strength, posterior vaginal wall support, and imaging consistent with LA tear are potential indicators of abnormal or prolonged recovery in this cohort with high-risk labor events.
Literature
19.
go back to reference Messelink B, Benson T, Berghmans B, Bo K, Corcos J, Fowler C, et al. Standardization of terminology of pelvic floor muscle function and dysfunction: report from the Pelvic Floor Clinical Assessment Group of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2005;24(4):374–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20144.CrossRefPubMed Messelink B, Benson T, Berghmans B, Bo K, Corcos J, Fowler C, et al. Standardization of terminology of pelvic floor muscle function and dysfunction: report from the Pelvic Floor Clinical Assessment Group of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2005;24(4):374–80. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​nau.​20144.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Laycock J (ed) (1994) Clinical evaluation of the pelvic floor. Pelvic floor re-education: principles and practice. London: Springer. Laycock J (ed) (1994) Clinical evaluation of the pelvic floor. Pelvic floor re-education: principles and practice. London: Springer.
21.
go back to reference Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7.CrossRefPubMed Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Defining “normal recovery” of pelvic floor function and appearance in a high-risk vaginal delivery cohort
Authors
Pamela S. Fairchild
Lisa Kane Low
Katherine M. Kowalk
Giselle E. Kolenic
John O. DeLancey
Dee E. Fenner
Publication date
01-03-2020
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 3/2020
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04152-z

Other articles of this Issue 3/2020

International Urogynecology Journal 3/2020 Go to the issue