EC Gynaecology

Research Article Volume 12 Issue 9 - 2023

Comparison of Surface Electrophysiological Parameters of the Pelvic Floor Between Three Types of Pelvic Floor Dysfunction in Perimenopausal Women

Chunyan Wang1, He Wang1, Meng LI1, Jie Wang1, Yan Che1,2* and Xinying Du1*

1People's Hospital of Weifang City, Shandong Province, China

2NHC Key Lab of Reproduction Regulation, Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Reproductive Health Drug and Devices, Shanghai Institute for Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Technologies, Shanghai, China

*Corresponding Author: Yan Che and Xinying Du, Department of Family Planning, People’s Hospital of Weifang City, Shandong Province, China. Email address: Yan Che: cheyan2004@163.com; Xinying Du: Duxy2012@126.com
Received: August 16, 2023; Published: August 24, 2023



Objective: To investigate the differences of pelvic floor surface electromyography (sEMG) parameters between perimenopausal women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP), stress urinary incontinence (SUI), and mixed POP and SUI pelvic floor dysfunction.

Methods: All women seeking treatment for perimenopausal pelvic floor dysfunction at our institution between April 2021 and March 2023 were invited to participate in the study and signed an informed consent form. Pelvic floor sEMG parameters were obtained by Glazer assessment using the Melander instrument (MLD A2 Deluxe). Pelvic floor sEMG parameters were compared between the three groups of patients with POP, SUI, and mixed POP with SUI. Differences in pelvic floor sEMG parameters between the three groups were compared using unordered multivariate logistic regression modeling to control for potential confounding factors.

Results: A total of 237 participants were included in this study, 92, 95, and 50 in the POP, SUI, and POP+SUI groups respectively. The median, P25, and P75 for fast muscle phase peak value, slow muscle phase mean, slow muscle phase variation, slow muscle phase rise time, and slow muscle phase recovery time in all participants were 33.70 (24.05, 46.99), 21.06 (13.35, 28.84), 0.27 (0.20, 0.34), 0.41 (0.27, 0.65) and 0.88 (0.62, 1.55) respectively, with a statistically significant difference in distribution between the three groups (p < 0.05). The total assessment score was closely correlated with the fast muscle score, the slow muscle score, and the slow muscle mean, with correlation coefficients ρ of 0.839, 0.822, and 0.805, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that the mean value of the anterior resting potential was significantly higher in the SUI group than in the POP group (P < 0.05), whereas the SUI+POP group had similar levels of pelvic floor sEMG parameters as the other two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: The mean value of the anterior resting potential is higher in patients with SUI than in those with POP. Patients with SUI may be candidates for treatment of perimenopausal pelvic floor dysfunction with a reduction of the anterior resting potential.

Keywords: Perimenopause; Pelvic Floor Dysfunction; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Stress Urinary Incontinence; Pelvic Floor Surface Electromyography

  1. Santoro N., et al. “The HRT Transition: Signs, Symptoms, and Management Options”. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism1 (2021): 1-15.
  2. Riaz H., et al. “Recent Advances in The Study of Patients with Rehabilitation combined with A Combined therapy”. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association7 (2022): 1456-1459.
  3. Pelvic: A Multidisciplinary Review”. Gastroenterology: Clinical Science and Practice1 (2012): 1-8.
  4. Yang JM., et al. “Comparative analysis of total spatial stress and muscle contraction in patients with combined floor disorders”. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology2 (2013): 224-229.
  5. Yang X., et al. “Effects of brain influence on brain performance in Postpartum Women with Stress Urinary Incontinence and academic differences between cognitive factors and cognitive abilities: Research progress in”. Clinical Research1 (2015): 124-134.
  6. Articular ł eksy ł., et al. “Articular values of Glazer Protocol for multidisciplinary assessment of muscle bioelectrical activity”. Medicine5 (2020): e19060.
  7. ł Elsy ł., et al. “Research on The Reliability of a Multidisciplinary Assessment of Muscle Bioelectrical Activity (sEMG) Using a multi-activity Measurement Protocol in Young Women”. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health2 (2014).
  8. John OL Delancey., et al. “Study on The Muscles of urethral and Urethral pressure measurements in Women with stress urinary incontinence”. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence2 (2003): 149-155.
  9. Falah-Hassani K., et al. “Pathophysiology of stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. International Urogynecology Journal3 (2021): 501-552.
  10. Tan RR., et al. “Electrophysiological analysis of pelvic floor muscle in perimenopausal women with stress urinary incontinence”. Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals4 (2016): 405-407.
  11. Chen J., et al. “Correlation between modified Oxford muscle strength scale and pelvic floor surface electromyography to assess pelvic floor muscle function in female patients with stress urinary incontinence”. Chinese Medical Journal37 (2020): 2908-2912.

Xinying Du, Yan Che., et al. Comparison of Surface Electrophysiological Parameters of the Pelvic Floor Between Three Types of Pelvic Floor Dysfunction in Perimenopausal Women. EC Gynaecology 12.9 (2023): 01-09.