ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT05530681DeliverUUUpdated Jul 1, 2024

Correlation Pelvic Floor Function and Ultrasound Findings One Year After Childbirth

An interventional study of Questionnaire and Pelvic floor ultrasound in Pelvic Floor Disorders, Obstetric Trauma and Urinary Incontinence, sponsored by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven. Recruiting at 1 site in Belgium. Open to female participants aged 18 Years to 45 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-07-01.

Sponsored by Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Sep 2024, 2 years 2 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Started Aug 2022; still recruiting 4 years 2 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
320
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years to 45 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

This is a single-center prospective cohort study sponsored by the University Hospitals Leuven (UZ). Women will undergo a pelvic floor ultrasound and will be asked to fill out a questionnaire at the time of their admission into the labour suite, at the postpartum check-up and 12 months postpartum.

The primary objective is to correlate self-reported symptoms of Pelvic Floor Dysfunction (PFD) (binary outcome) at one year after delivery with structural changes to the Pelvic Floor Muscles (PFM) and postpartum evidence of levator avulsion (binary indicator) as measured by TransPerineal UltraSound (TPUS).

Secondary objectives are to compare demographical and obstetrical variables between patients suffering from PFD symptoms or pelvic floor injury (documented one year after delivery) and those who do not; to record how patients manage and cope with PFD including recovery and compliance with Pelvic Floor Muscle Training (PFMT) as prescribed in the standard pathway of peripartum care; and to use of TPUS images for the development of artificial intelligence tools for automated image analysis.

Primary outcomes are PFD symptoms one year after delivery and injury to the PFM evidenced by POP-Q and TPUS. The demographic variables and information about the pregnancy and the delivery will be obtained from the medical records.

The presence and severity of PFD will be measured using standardized self-reporting tools: Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Index (POP-DI), Patient Assessment Constipation-SYMptoms (PAC-SYM), International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Urinary Incontinence - Short Form (ICIQ-SF), St. Mark's Incontinence Score (SMIS), Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), Female Sexual Distress Scale - Revised (FSDS-R). FSFI is a widely used generic tool with sufficient granularity and validated in a large number of languages. FSDS-R assesses the construct "personal distress", which has been considered as an additional important aspect contributing to sexual dysfunction of women.

PFD, as a clustered outcome, being the presence of any kind of pelvic floor dysfunction symptoms, will be defined as POP-DI score of ≥11 OR ICIQ-SF score of ≥1 OR SMIS score of ≥1 OR FSFI score ≤ 26.55 OR FSDS-R score ≥11.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pelvic Floor Disorders
  • Obstetric Trauma
  • Urinary Incontinence
  • Anal Incontinence
  • Pelvic Organ Prolapse
  • Pelvic Pain
  • Sexual Dysfunction
  • Constipation
  • Anal Sphincter Injury

Keywords

  • urinary incontinence
  • anal incontinence
  • pelvic organ prolapse
  • sexual dysfunction
  • constipation
  • postpartum
  • levator avulsion
  • anal sphincter injury
03

In context

Pelvic Floor Disorders

212 studies on the registry are indexed under Pelvic Floor Disorders; 46 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 320 is above the median of 63 across 148 interventional studies indexed under Pelvic Floor Disorders.

Browse Pelvic Floor Disorders studies →

Lead sponsor

Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven is the lead sponsor of 963 studies on the registry; 267 are open to participants now.

Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 45 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • age = or > 18 years
  • Dutch/English-speaking
  • > 33 weeks gestation
  • delivering in UZ Leuven
  • vaginal delivery

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • age \< 18 years
  • not Dutch/English-speaking
  • \< 33 weeks gestation
  • not delivering in UZ Leuven
  • non-vaginal delivery
  • Any disorder, that independently from delivery, affects pelvic floor function or structure, such as, but not limited to musculoskeletal or neurologic diseases.
  • any women with drug addiction, cognitive deficit, language-barrier and illiteracy
  • any disorder or timing or circumstances, which in the Investigator's opinion represents an obstacle to proper , or safe and/or compliant participation.
  • any prior or simultaneous treatment(s) potentially jeopardising safety or compromising trial integrity.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
320 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Participants

    Diagnostic Test: Questionnaire · Diagnostic Test: Pelvic floor ultrasound

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testQuestionnaire

    The survey consists in standardized and validated questionnaires on urinary function (ICIQ-SF, 4 items), bowel function (SMIS, 7 items and PAC-SYM, 12 items), symptoms of prolapse (POPDI, 6 items) and sexual function (Female Sexual Function Index FSFI, 19 items and Female Sexual Distress Scale - Revised FSDS-R, 13 items). questionnaire will be used at recruitment, at the postpartum visit, at the first annual follow-up visit.

  • Diagnostic testPelvic floor ultrasound

    Pelvic floor ultrasound is the preferred imaging modality for documenting pelvic floor anatomy during pregnancy or after delivery. This examination is routinely performed in the outpatient clinic during patient visits (including the one year check-up after delivery). The technique used to assess the pelvic floor is described in detail in the 2019 practice parameters issued by IUGA.

    Also known as: Transperineal ultrasound, Pelvic floor sonography

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Urinary incontinence

    International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-SF) score of ≥1 (score range 0-21, higher scores mean worse urinary incontinence)

    Time frame: one year postpartum

  2. Anal Incontinence

    St Mark's Incontinence Score (SMIS) ≥1 (score range 0-24, higher scores mean worse anal incontinence)

    Time frame: one year postpartum

  3. Sexual dysfunction

    Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) score ≤ 26.55 (score range 2 to 36, worse scores mean worse sexual function) OR FSDS-R score ≥11 (score range 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating more sexually related distress)

    Time frame: one year postpartum

  4. Constipation according to the Rome IV criteria

    Must include two or more of the following:\*\* Straining during more than ¼ (25%) of defecations Lumpy or hard stools (Bristol Stool Form Scale 1-2) more than ¼ (25%) of defecations Sensation of incomplete evacuation more than ¼ (25%) of defecations Sensation of anorectal obstruction/blockage more than ¼ (25%) of defecations Manual maneuvers to facilitate more than ¼ (25%) of defecations (e.g., digital evacuation, support of the pelvic floor) Fewer than three SBM per week Loose stools are rarely present without the use of laxatives Insufficient criteria for irritable bowel syndrome

    Time frame: one year postpartum

Secondary outcomes

  1. levator avulsion

    complete avulsion is defined as complete detachment of the puborectalis part of the levator ani muscle from the inferior pubic ramus on 3 out of 8 tomographic ultrasound imaging slices of the pelvic floor during contraction

    Time frame: 1 year

  2. levator hiatus antero-posterior diameter (cm)

    Time frame: 1 year

  3. levator hiatus latero-lateral diameter (cm)

    Time frame: 1 year

  4. levator hiatus surface (cm2)

    Time frame: 1 year

  5. anal sphincter injury

    residual defect of at least 30 degrees on Tomographic Ultrasound Imaging

    Time frame: 1 year

  6. co-contraction

    approximation of the dorsal puborectalis to the symphysis pubis during Valsalva manoeuvre

    Time frame: 1 year

  7. pelvic organ descent

    descent of bladder/cervix/ampulla rectalis under the level of the symphysis pubis

    Time frame: 1 year

  8. bladder neck mobility

    axial descent of the bladder neck during Valsalva manoeuvre

    Time frame: 1 year

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Avery K, Donovan J, Peters TJ, Shaw C, Gotoh M, Abrams P. ICIQ: a brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2004;23(4):322-30. doi: 10.1002/nau.20041. PubMed 15227649 ↗
  • Basson R, Berman J, Burnett A, Derogatis L, Ferguson D, Fourcroy J, Goldstein I, Graziottin A, Heiman J, Laan E, Leiblum S, Padma-Nathan H, Rosen R, Segraves K, Segraves RT, Shabsigh R, Sipski M, Wagner G, Whipple B. Report of the international consensus development conference on female sexual dysfunction: definitions and classifications. J Urol. 2000 Mar;163(3):888-93. PubMed 10688001 ↗
  • Baser RE, Li Y, Carter J. Psychometric validation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in cancer survivors. Cancer. 2012 Sep 15;118(18):4606-18. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26739. Epub 2012 Feb 22. PubMed 22359250 ↗
  • Bo K. Does pelvic floor muscle training prevent and treat urinary and fecal incontinence in pregnancy? Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2009 Mar;6(3):122-3. doi: 10.1038/ncpuro1313. Epub 2009 Feb 3. PubMed 19190594 ↗
  • Bo K. Pelvic floor muscle training in treatment of female stress urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse and sexual dysfunction. World J Urol. 2012 Aug;30(4):437-43. doi: 10.1007/s00345-011-0779-8. Epub 2011 Oct 9. PubMed 21984473 ↗
  • Bo K, Braekken IH, Majida M, Engh ME. Constriction of the levator hiatus during instruction of pelvic floor or transversus abdominis contraction: a 4D ultrasound study. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009 Jan;20(1):27-32. doi: 10.1007/s00192-008-0719-3. Epub 2008 Sep 20. PubMed 18806912 ↗
  • Bo K, Finckenhagen HB. Vaginal palpation of pelvic floor muscle strength: inter-test reproducibility and comparison between palpation and vaginal squeeze pressure. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2001 Oct;80(10):883-7. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0412.2001.801003.x. PubMed 11580731 ↗
  • Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, Shull BL, Smith AR. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Jul;175(1):10-7. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(96)70243-0. PubMed 8694033 ↗
  • Callewaert G, Albersen M, Janssen K, Damaser MS, Van Mieghem T, van der Vaart CH, Deprest J. The impact of vaginal delivery on pelvic floor function - delivery as a time point for secondary prevention. BJOG. 2016 Apr;123(5):678-81. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13505. Epub 2015 Jul 6. No abstract available. PubMed 26147210 ↗
  • DeLancey JO. The hidden epidemic of pelvic floor dysfunction: achievable goals for improved prevention and treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 May;192(5):1488-95. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.02.028. PubMed 15902147 ↗
  • Derogatis L, Clayton A, Lewis-D'Agostino D, Wunderlich G, Fu Y. Validation of the female sexual distress scale-revised for assessing distress in women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. J Sex Med. 2008 Feb;5(2):357-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00672.x. Epub 2007 Nov 27. PubMed 18042215 ↗
  • Dietz HP. Pelvic floor ultrasound: a review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Apr;202(4):321-34. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.018. PubMed 20350640 ↗
  • Dietz HP, Shek C, Clarke B. Biometry of the pubovisceral muscle and levator hiatus by three-dimensional pelvic floor ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jun;25(6):580-5. doi: 10.1002/uog.1899. PubMed 15883982 ↗
  • Fleiss JL, Tytun A, Ury HK. A simple approximation for calculating sample sizes for comparing independent proportions. Biometrics. 1980 Jun;36(2):343-6. PubMed 26625475 ↗
  • Frank L, Kleinman L, Farup C, Taylor L, Miner P Jr. Psychometric validation of a constipation symptom assessment questionnaire. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1999 Sep;34(9):870-7. doi: 10.1080/003655299750025327. PubMed 10522604 ↗
  • Frawley HC, Galea MP, Phillips BA, Sherburn M, Bo K. Effect of test position on pelvic floor muscle assessment. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2006 Jun;17(4):365-71. doi: 10.1007/s00192-005-0016-3. Epub 2005 Oct 5. PubMed 16205845 ↗
  • Garcia-Mejido JA, Idoia-Valero I, Aguilar-Galvez IM, Borrero Gonzalez C, Fernandez-Palacin A, Sainz JA. Association between sexual dysfunction and avulsion of the levator ani muscle after instrumental vaginal delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Sep;99(9):1246-1252. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13852. Epub 2020 Apr 12. PubMed 32198764 ↗
  • AIUM/IUGA practice parameter for the performance of Urogynecological ultrasound examinations : Developed in collaboration with the ACR, the AUGS, the AUA, and the SRU. Int Urogynecol J. 2019 Sep;30(9):1389-1400. doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-03954-5. No abstract available. PubMed 31111173 ↗
  • Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Berghmans B, Lee J, Monga A, Petri E, Rizk DE, Sand PK, Schaer GN. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J. 2010 Jan;21(1):5-26. doi: 10.1007/s00192-009-0976-9. Epub 2009 Nov 25. PubMed 19937315 ↗
  • Kamel R, Montaguti E, Nicolaides KH, Soliman M, Dodaro MG, Negm S, Pilu G, Momtaz M, Youssef A. Contraction of the levator ani muscle during Valsalva maneuver (coactivation) is associated with a longer active second stage of labor in nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Feb;220(2):189.e1-189.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.10.013. Epub 2018 Oct 12. PubMed 30321525 ↗
  • Madhu C, Swift S, Moloney-Geany S, Drake MJ. How to use the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) system? Neurourol Urodyn. 2018 Aug;37(S6):S39-S43. doi: 10.1002/nau.23740. PubMed 30614056 ↗
  • Neijenhuijs KI, Hooghiemstra N, Holtmaat K, Aaronson NK, Groenvold M, Holzner B, Terwee CB, Cuijpers P, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI)-A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties. J Sex Med. 2019 May;16(5):640-660. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.03.001. Epub 2019 Apr 5. PubMed 30956110 ↗
  • Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S, Meston C, Shabsigh R, Ferguson D, D'Agostino R Jr. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2000 Apr-Jun;26(2):191-208. doi: 10.1080/009262300278597. PubMed 10782451 ↗
  • Rostaminia G, Javadian P, Awad C, Shobeiri SA. Ultrasound Indicators of Rectal Support Defect in Women With Obstructive Defecatory Symptoms. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2019 May/Jun;25(3):222-225. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000511. PubMed 29300257 ↗
  • Solans-Domenech M, Sanchez E, Espuna-Pons M; Pelvic Floor Research Group (Grup de Recerca del Sol Pelvia; GRESP). Urinary and anal incontinence during pregnancy and postpartum: incidence, severity, and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Mar;115(3):618-628. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181d04dff. PubMed 20177295 ↗
  • ter Kuile MM, Brauer M, Laan E. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and the Female Sexual Distress Scale (FSDS): psychometric properties within a Dutch population. J Sex Marital Ther. 2006 Jul-Sep;32(4):289-304. doi: 10.1080/00926230600666261. PubMed 16709550 ↗
  • Thom DH, Rortveit G. Prevalence of postpartum urinary incontinence: a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010 Dec;89(12):1511-22. doi: 10.3109/00016349.2010.526188. Epub 2010 Nov 5. PubMed 21050146 ↗
  • Thomas V, Shek KL, Guzman Rojas R, Dietz HP. Temporal latency between pelvic floor trauma and presentation for prolapse surgery: a retrospective observational study. Int Urogynecol J. 2015 Aug;26(8):1185-9. doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2677-x. Epub 2015 Apr 3. PubMed 25837351 ↗
  • Urbankova I, Grohregin K, Hanacek J, Krcmar M, Feyereisl J, Deprest J, Krofta L. The effect of the first vaginal birth on pelvic floor anatomy and dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J. 2019 Oct;30(10):1689-1696. doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-04044-2. Epub 2019 Jul 20. PubMed 31327032 ↗
  • Utomo E, Blok BF, Steensma AB, Korfage IJ. Validation of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) in a Dutch population. Int Urogynecol J. 2014 Apr;25(4):531-44. doi: 10.1007/s00192-013-2263-z. Epub 2014 Jan 21. PubMed 24445668 ↗
  • Vaizey CJ, Carapeti E, Cahill JA, Kamm MA. Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems. Gut. 1999 Jan;44(1):77-80. doi: 10.1136/gut.44.1.77. PubMed 9862829 ↗
  • van Delft KW, Thakar R, Sultan AH, IntHout J, Kluivers KB. The natural history of levator avulsion one year following childbirth: a prospective study. BJOG. 2015 Aug;122(9):1266-73. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13223. Epub 2014 Dec 17. PubMed 25514994 ↗
  • Wang X, Ji X. Sample Size Estimation in Clinical Research: From Randomized Controlled Trials to Observational Studies. Chest. 2020 Jul;158(1S):S12-S20. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.010. PubMed 32658647 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Aug 2022 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Sep 2024, 24 months after the start.

Of 101 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Pelvic Floor Disorders, half reached primary completion within 16 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 7 and three quarters within 31. This study's planned 24 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 107 studies reached it within 16 months; a quarter within 7 and three quarters within 31.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jul 6, 2022
First posted
Sep 7, 2022
StartActual
Aug 17, 2022
Primary completionEst.
Sep 1, 2024
CompletionEst.
Sep 1, 2025
Last update
Jul 1, 2024
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 1, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05530681
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Sep 7, 2022
Start date
Aug 17, 2022
Primary completion
Sep 1, 2024 (estimated)
Completion
Sep 1, 2025 (estimated)
Last update
Jul 1, 2024

Study contacts

Jan Deprest, MD, PhD
Contact
jan.deprest@uzleuven.be
+3216344269
Jan Deprest, MD, PhD
principal investigator · Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion