Download PDF
Am J Perinatol 2013; 30(03): 191-196
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1322518
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Measuring the Angle of the Subpubic Arch Using Three-Dimensional Transperineal Ultrasound Scan: Intraoperator Repeatability and Interoperator Reproducibility

Sarah Choi
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
,
Symphorosa Shing Chee Chan
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
,
Daljit Singh Sahota
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
,
Tak Yeung Leung
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

08 March 2012

31 March 2012

Publication Date:
08 August 2012 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective A method of measuring the subpubic arch angle using three-dimensional transperineal ultrasound scan (3DTUS) was developed, and the intraoperator repeatability and interoperator reproducibility were investigated.

Study Design Using 3DTUS, volume data sets were obtained from the nine nulliparous pregnant women by three operators (A, B, and C) in each of the three study sessions. With volume reconstruction, a plane along the inferior edges of bilateral inferior pubic rami was obtained on the axial section. The angle made between the innermost points of both inferior pubic rami at the level of urethra and the inferoposterior point of symphysis pubis was measured as the subpubic arch angle. The intraoperator repeatability of the experienced operator (A) and the interoperator reproducibility between A, B, and C were assessed by the repeatability coefficient and the interoperator intraclass correlation (ICC), respectively.

Results A total of 27 women were examined. The intraoperator repeatability was 4.73 degrees. The overall interoperator ICC was 0.860, and increased from 0.794 in the first session to 0.945 in the third session.

Conclusion With 3DTUS, it is feasible to measure subpubic arch angle with satisfactory intraoperator repeatability and interoperator reproducibility. This easy-to-learn technique extends the possibilities of future pelvimetry research using 3DTUS.

Keywords

subpubic arch angle - transperineal ultrasound - repeatability - reproducibility - intraoperator - interoperator
 

  • References

  • 1 Sze EH, Kohli N, Miklos JR, Roat T, Karram MM. Computed tomography comparison of bony pelvis dimensions between women with and without genital prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93: 229-232
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Frudinger A, Halligan S, Spencer JAD, Bartram CI, Kamm MA, Winter R. Influence of the subpubic arch angle on anal sphincter trauma and anal incontinence following childbirth. BJOG 2002; 109: 1207-1212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Handa VL, Pannu HK, Siddique S, Gutman R, VanRooyen J, Cundiff G. Architectural differences in the bony pelvis of women with and without pelvic floor disorders. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102: 1283-1290
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Zaretsky MV, Alexander JM, McIntire DD, Hatab MR, Twickler DM, Leveno KJ. Magnetic resonance imaging pelvimetry and the prediction of labor dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106 (5 Pt 1) 919-926
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Berger M, Doumouchtsis S, DeLancey J. Bony pelvis dimensions in women with and without stress urinary incontinence. Paper presented at: 41st Annual Meeting of the International Continence Society (ICS); August 29, 2011; Glasgow, UK. Available at: http://webcasts.prous.com/ics2011/html/1-en/template.aspx?section=7&p=7,19573# . Assessed March 7, 2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Handa VL, Lockhart ME, Kenton KS , et al. Magnetic resonance assessment of pelvic anatomy and pelvic floor disorders after childbirth. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2009; 20: 133-139
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Dietz HP. Ultrasound imaging of the pelvic floor. Part I: two-dimensional aspects. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23: 80-92
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Dietz HP. Pelvic floor ultrasound: a review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 202: 321-334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 MacLennan RN. Interrater reliability with SPSS for Windows 5.0. Am Stat 1993; 47: 292-296
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Shek KL, Dietz HP. Intrapartum risk factors for levator trauma. BJOG 2010; 117: 1485-1492
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chan SS, Cheung RY, Yiu AK , et al. Prevalence of levator ani muscle injury in Chinese primiparous women after first delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 39: 704-709
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dietz HP. Pelvic floor ultrasound in incontinence: what's in it for the surgeon?. Int Urogynecol J 2011; 22: 1085-1097
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Handa VL, Lockhart ME, Fielding JR , et al; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Racial differences in pelvic anatomy by magnetic resonance imaging. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111: 914-920
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Igbigbi PS, Nanono-Igbigbi AM. Determination of sex and race from the subpubic angle in Ugandan subjects. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 2003; 24: 168-172
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Msamati BC, Igbigbi PS, Manda JK. The sub-pubic angle in adult indigenous Malawian subjects. East Afr Med J 2005; 82: 643-648
    PubMedGoogle Scholar