Show simple item record

Magnetic resonance imaging of vaginal support structure before and after Vecchietti procedure in women with Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome

dc.contributor.authorHuebner, Markus
dc.contributor.authorDeLancey, John O.L.
dc.contributor.authorReisenauer, Christl
dc.contributor.authorBrucker, Sara Y.
dc.contributor.authorPreibsch, Heike
dc.contributor.authorFleischer, Sabrina
dc.contributor.authorSchoeller, Dorit
dc.contributor.authorStefanescu, Diana
dc.contributor.authorRall, Katharina
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-13T15:47:36Z
dc.date.available2019-09-04T20:15:39Zen
dc.date.issued2018-07
dc.identifier.citationHuebner, Markus; DeLancey, John O.L.; Reisenauer, Christl; Brucker, Sara Y.; Preibsch, Heike; Fleischer, Sabrina; Schoeller, Dorit; Stefanescu, Diana; Rall, Katharina (2018). "Magnetic resonance imaging of vaginal support structure before and after Vecchietti procedure in women with Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome." Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 97(7): 830-837.
dc.identifier.issn0001-6349
dc.identifier.issn1600-0412
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/144648
dc.description.abstractIntroductionIt is unclear how pelvic floor supporting structures might be affected by the absence of the vagina. It was the aim of this prospective study to analyze the magnetic resonance imaging morphology of pelvic support prior and after a Vecchietti procedure in women suffering Mullerian agenesis (Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome).Material and methods26 women with a diagnosis of Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome associated vaginal agenesis were recruited prospectively prior to the laparoscopic creation of a neovagina according to the Vecchietti procedure. The primary outcome measure was the magnetic resonance imaging morphology of supporting structures. Secondary outcome measures were anatomical and functional vaginal length. Follow up was conducted six months after surgery.ResultsTwenty‐six women were analyzed. Mean age was 19.8 ± 4.4 years (±SD) and mean body mass index was 23.7 ± 4.3 kg/m2 (±SD). All were Caucasian. Supporting structures consistent with cardinal and uterosacral ligaments were visible on magnetic resonance imaging in all cases (100%). There were no levator ani defects. The vaginal apex could be visualized postoperatively in 12 women (46.2%) reaching up to Level I. The vagina was visible in both Level II and III with normal relations to the pelvic walls in all cases. On gynecological examination, vaginal length was 8.8 ± 2.1 cm (mean ± SD) anatomically and 10.2 ± 2.2 cm (mean ± SD) functionally.ConclusionsThe preoperative presence of pelvic support structures into which the vagina is lengthened by the surgery likely explains the uncommon occurrence of vaginal prolapse in women who had the Vecchietti procedure.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherprolapse
dc.subject.othersurgical techniques
dc.subject.otherurogynecology
dc.subject.otherendoscopic surgery
dc.subject.otherMayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser
dc.subject.otherMullerian agenesis
dc.subject.otherPerineum
dc.titleMagnetic resonance imaging of vaginal support structure before and after Vecchietti procedure in women with Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelObstetrics and Gynecology
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/144648/1/aogs13350_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/144648/2/aogs13350.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/aogs.13350
dc.identifier.sourceActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuebner M, Rall K, Brucker SY, Reisenauer C, Siegmann‐Luz KC, DeLancey JO. The rectovaginal septum: visible on magnetic resonance images of women with Mayer‐Rokitansky‐Kuster‐Hauser syndrome (Mullerian agenesis). Int Urogynecol J. 2014; 25: 323 – 7.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAittomaki K, Eroila H, Kajanoja P. A population‐based study of the incidence of Mullerian aplasia in Finland. Fertil Steril. 2001; 76: 624 – 5.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHerlin M, Bjorn AM, Rasmussen M, Trolle B, Petersen MB. Prevalence and patient characteristics of Mayer‐Rokitansky‐Kuster‐Hauser syndrome: a nationwide registry‐based study. Hum Reprod. 2016; 31: 2384 – 90.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFolch M, Pigem I, Konje JC. Mullerian agenesis: etiology, diagnosis, and management. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2000; 55: 644 – 9.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRall K, Barresi G, Walter M, Poths S, Haebig K, Schaeferhoff K, et al. A combination of transcriptome and methylation analyses reveals embryologically‐relevant candidate genes in MRKH patients. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2011; 6: 32.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLedig S, Schippert C, Strick R, Beckmann MW, Oppelt PG, Wieacker P. Recurrent aberrations identified by array‐CGH in patients with Mayer‐Rokitansky‐Kuster‐Hauser syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2011; 95: 1589 – 94.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCommittee on Adolescent Health Care. Committee opinion: no. 562: Müllerian agenesis: diagnosis, management, and treatment. Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 121: 1134 – 7.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRouth JC, Laufer MR, Cannon GM Jr, Diamond DA, Gargollo PC. Management strategies for Mayer‐Rokitansky‐Kuster‐Hauser related vaginal agenesis: a cost‐effectiveness analysis. J Urol. 2010; 184: 2116 – 21.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrucker SY, Gegusch M, Zubke W, Rall K, Gauwerky JF, Wallwiener D. Neovagina creation in vaginal agenesis: development of a new laparoscopic Vecchietti‐based procedure and optimized instruments in a prospective comparative interventional study in 101 patients. Fertil Steril. 2008; 90: 1940 – 52.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRall K, Schickner MC, Barresi G, Schonfisch B, Wallwiener M, Wallwiener CW, et al. Laparoscopically assisted neovaginoplasty in vaginal agenesis: a long‐term outcome study in 240 patients. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2014; 27: 379 – 85.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCalcagno M, Pastore M, Bellati F, Plotti F, Maffucci D, Boni T, et al. Early prolapse of a neovagina created with self‐dilatation and treated with sacrospinous ligament suspension in a patient with Mayer‐Rokitansky‐Kuster‐Hauser syndrome: a case report. Fertil Steril. 2010; 93: 267.e1 – 4.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCoulon C, Orazi G, Nayama M, Cosson M. Prolapse of neovagina created with labia minora: a case report. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2005; 16: 409 – 11.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFedele L, Frontino G, Motta F, Peruzzi E. Davydov’s procedure for the treatment of neovaginal prolapse in Rokitansky syndrome. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011; 18: 503 – 6.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHenninger V, Reisenauer C, Brucker SY, Rall K. Laparoscopic nerve‐preserving colposacropexy for surgical management of neovaginal prolapse. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2015; 28: e153 – 5.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKondo W, Ribeiro R, Tsumanuma FK, Zomer MT. Laparoscopic promontofixation for the treatment of recurrent sigmoid neovaginal prolapse: case report and systematic review of the literature. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012; 19: 176 – 82.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKuhn A, Neukomm C, Dreher EF, Imobersteg J, Mueller MD. Prolapse and sexual function 8 years after neovagina according to Shears: a study of 43 cases with Mayer‐von Rokitansky‐Kuster‐Hauser syndrome. Int Urogynecol J. 2013; 24: 1047 – 52.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMuir TW, Walters MD. Surgical management of vaginal vault prolapse in a woman with a neovagina and pelvic kidneys. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 104 ( 5 Pt 2 ): 1199 – 201.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchaffer J, Fabricant C, Carr BR. Vaginal vault prolapse after nonsurgical and surgical treatment of MAAdullerian agenesis. Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 99 ( 5 Pt 2 ): 947 – 9.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSwenson CW, DeLancey JO, Schimpf MO. Left‐sided sacrospinous ligament suspension for treating recurrent sigmoid neovagina prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2014; 25: 1593 – 5.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDeLancey JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992; 166 ( 6 Pt 1 ): 1717 – 24; discussion 24–8.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMorgan DM, Umek W, Stein T, Hsu Y, Guire K, DeLancey JO. Interrater reliability of assessing levator ani muscle defects with magnetic resonance images. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007; 18: 773 – 8.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S, Meston C, Shabsigh R, et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self‐report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2000; 26: 191 – 208.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWiegel M, Meston C, Rosen R. The female sexual function index (FSFI): cross‐validation and development of clinical cutoff scores. J Sex Marital Ther. 2005; 31: 1 – 20.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBaden WF, Walker TA, Lindsey JH. The vaginal profile. Tex Med. 1968; 64: 56 – 8.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLudwig KS. The Mayer‐Rokitansky‐Kuster syndrome. An analysis of its morphology and embryology. Part II: embryology. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 1998; 262: 27 – 42.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLuo J, Betschart C, Ashton‐Miller JA, DeLancey JO. Quantitative analyses of variability in normal vaginal shape and dimension on MR images. Int Urogynecol J. 2016; 27: 1087 – 95.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFritsch H, Frohlich B. Development of the levator ani muscle in human fetuses. Early Hum Dev. 1994; 37: 15 – 25.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePower RM. Embryological development of the levator ani muscle. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1948; 55: 367 – 81.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevi AC, Borghi F, Garavoglia M. Development of the anal canal muscles. Dis Colon Rectum. 1991; 34: 262 – 6.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNygaard I, Barber MD, Burgio KL, Kenton K, Meikle S, Schaffer J, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in US women. JAMA. 2008; 300: 1311 – 6.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.