Original articles

Analysis of ultrasonic two-step assessment of postpartum diastasis recti abdominis and related risk factors in parturients at 42-day postpartum

  • GAO Yihui ,
  • ZHANG Huiping ,
  • ZHOU Yuqing
Expand
  • Department of Ultrasound, Shanghai Changning Maternity and Infant Health Hospital/Maternity and Infant Health Hospital Affiliated to East China Normal University, Shanghai 200050, China

Received date: 2024-03-13

  Revised date: 2025-03-02

  Online published: 2025-12-25

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the incidence and severity of diastasis recti abdominis (DRA) in parturients at the 42-day postpartum and analyze the maternal and infant risk factors associated with postpartum DRA occurrence using a two-step method with conventional two-dimensional ultrasonography. Methods Postpartum women (consecutive cases) who delivered at our hospital and underwent the 42-day postpartum checkups between September and October 2022 were included in this study. All enrolled women first performed curl-up movement under the guidance of a sonographer, and the boundaries of the rectus abdominis were located in the contracted state using conventional two-dimensional ultrasound (first step). Then, the parturients were instructed to lie supine in a relaxed state of rectus abdominis to measure the inter-rectus distances (IRD) (second step). The IRD was measured at three locations: 3 cm above the umbilicus, at the level of the umbilicus, and 3 cm below the umbilicus. The diagnosis of DRA was established and classified into mild, moderate, and severe groups according to the guidelines of the European Hernia Society for DRA management. The incidence of DRA and the proportion of mild, moderate, and severe cases were statistically analyzed. Maternal information (including age) and infant information (including birth weight) were recorded. Statistical analysis was conducted to examine the relationships of these maternal and infant factors with the occurrence and severity of DRA. Results A total of 400 parturients were enrolled in this study. The incidence of DRA was 81.75% (327/400), including 171 cases of mild DRA (52.29%), 152 cases of mode-rate DRA (46.48%), and 4 cases of severe DRA (1.22%). Compared with the non-DRA group, the DRA group had higher neonatal birth weight (3 385 g vs. 3 190 g, P<0.001), a higher rate of cesarean section (114/327 vs. 13/73, P=0.005), and a higher proportion of women with parity >1 (89/327 vs. 11/73, P=0.030). No statistically significant differences were observed for other maternal or infant factors between the two groups. Binary logistic regression analysis showed that higher neonatal birth weight, cesarean section, and higher parity were independent risk factors for DRA (OR: 1.001, 2.549, and 2.053, respectively). Compared with the mild DRA group, the moderate DRA group had higher neonatal birth weight (3 401 g vs. 3 370 g, P=0.036), a higher rate of cesarean section (70/152 vs. 42/171, P<0.001), a higher proportion of women with parity greater than 1 (49/152 vs. 36/171, P=0.030), and a higher pre-delivery body mass index (BMI) (26 vs. 25, P=0.023). No statistically significant differences were observed for other parameters between the two groups. Conclusions The incidence of DRA among postpartum women is relatively high, with nearly half of the cases being moderate or severe, respectively. The two-step method using conventional two-dimensional ultrasonography is of significant clinical value for the timely detection of abnormalities. It facilitates the provision of timely and precise postpartum rehabilitation guidance tailored to different severity levels. Furthermore, this two-step method offers the advantages of simpler and more accurate delineation of the borders of the rectus abdominis. Maternal and infant risk factors, including neonatal birth weight, cesa-rean section, parity, and pre-delivery maternal BMI, affect the occurrence and severity of postpartum DRA.

Cite this article

GAO Yihui , ZHANG Huiping , ZHOU Yuqing . Analysis of ultrasonic two-step assessment of postpartum diastasis recti abdominis and related risk factors in parturients at 42-day postpartum[J]. Journal of Diagnostics Concepts & Practice, 2025 , 24(06) : 641 -647 . DOI: 10.16150/j.1671-2870.2025.06.010

References

[1] 孙秀丽, 李环, 苏园园, 等. 产后腹直肌分离诊断与治疗的专家共识[J]. 中国妇产科临床杂志, 2021, 22(02): 220-221.
  SUN X L, LI H, SU Y Y, et al. Expert Consensus on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Postpartum Diastasis Recti Abdominis[J]. Chin J Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2021, 22(2): 220-221.
[2] 郑新烈, 陈潇宇, 涂素华, 等. 产后女性腹直肌分离危险因素的Meta分析[J]. 全科护理, 2022, 20(27): 3754-3758.
  ZHENG X L, CHEN X Y, TU S H, et al. Meta-analysis of risk factors for diastasis recti abdominis in postpartum woman[J] Chin Gene Pract Nurs, 2022, 20(27): 3754-3758.
[3] QU E, WU J, ZHANG M, et al. The ultrasound diagnostic criteria for diastasis recti and its correlation with pelvic floor dysfunction in early postpartum women[J]. Quant Imaging Med Surg, 2021, 11(2): 706.
[4] 叶秀琴, 潘群艳. 产后腹直肌分离高频超声特征及其与分娩方式的相关性研究[J]. 中华全科医学, 2023, 21(3): 469-472.
  YE X Q, PAN Q Y. High-frequency ultrasound characte-ristics of postpartum rectus abdominis separation after delivery and its correlation with delivery mode[J]. Chin J Gene Pract, 2023, 21(3): 469-472.
[5] GLUPPE S B, ENGH M E, B? K. Immediate effect of abdominal and pelvic floor muscle exercises on interrecti distance in women with diastasis recti abdominis who were parous[J]. Phys Ther, 2020, 100(8): 1372-1383.
[6] 蔡留芸, 邓芯茹, 陆彦旭, 等. 超声评估初产妇产后6周腹直肌分离情况及影响因素[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2021, 29(11): 1134-1138.
  CAI L Y, DENG X R, LU Y X, et al. Diastasis recti abdominis in primipara women at 6 weeks after childbirth measured by ultrasound and risk factors[J]. Chin J Med Imaging, 2021, 29(11): 1134-1138.
[7] 张明珠, 牛敏昌, 刘菲菲, 等. 高频超声评价产后女性腹直肌分离类型的初步研究[J]. 中国临床医学影像杂志, 2022, 33(3): 201-205.
  ZHANG M Z, NIU M C, LIU F F, et al. Preliminary study of high frequency ultrasound on evaluating the types of diastasis recti abdominis in postpartum women[J]. J Chin Clin Med Imaging, 2022, 33(3): 201-205.
[8] FERMANDES D A MOTA P G, PASCOAL A G, CARITA AI, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of diastasis recti abdominis from late pregnancy to 6 months postpartum, and relationship with lumbo-pelvic pain[J]. Man Ther, 2015, 20(1): 200-205.
[9] SPERSTAD J B, TENNFJORD M K, HILDE G, et al. Diastasis recti abdominis during pregnancy and 12?months after childbirth: prevalence, risk factors and report of lumbopelvic pain[J]. Br J Sports Med, 2016, 50(17): 1092-1096.
[10] 邓炳俊, 乐连利, 肖红红. 产后女性腹直肌分离对盆底功能及性生活质量的影响[J]. 吉林医学, 2024, 45(11): 2668-2672.
  DENG B J, LE L L, XIAO H H. The impact of postpartum diastasis rectus abdominis on pelvic floor function and sexual quality of life[J] Jilin Med, 2024, 45(11): 2668-2672.
[11] 王青, 于晓杰, 杨欣, 等. 产后腹直肌分离发生的影响因素研究[J]. 现代妇产科进展. 2019, 28(12): 913-916.
  WANG Q, YU X J, YANG X, et al. Risk factors for diastasis recti abdominis after delivery[J]. Prog Obstet Gyneco, 2019, 28(12): 913-916
[12] HERNáDEZ-GRANADOS P, HENRIKSEN NA, BERREVOET F, et al. European Hernia Society guidelines on management of rectus diastasis[J]. Br J Surg, 2021, 108(10): 1189-1191.
[13] KAUFMANN R L, REINER C S, DIETZ U A, et al. Normal width of the linea alba, prevalence, and risk factors for diastasis recti abdominis in adults, a cross-sectional study[J]. Hernia, 2022: 1-10.
[14] 阚晓纯, 尤玲英, 顾娟芬, 等. 产后腹直肌分离的超声诊断与分型分类研究[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2022, 26(15): 26-29,35.
  KAN X C, YOU L Y, GU J F, et al. Ultrasonic diagnosis and typing classification of postpartum diastasis recti abdominis[J]. J Clin Med Pract, 2022, 26(15): 26-29+35.
[15] MOTA P, PASCOAL AG, SANCHO F, et al. Reliability of the inter-rectus distance measured by palpation. Comparison of palpation and ultrasound measurements[J]. Man Ther, 2013, 18(4): 294-298.
[16] KESHWANI N, MCLEAN L. Ultrasound imaging in postpartum women with diastasis recti: intrarater between-session reliability[J]. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 2015, 45(9): 713-718.
[17] 郑嘉明, 任苓, 张朋燕, 等. 腹直肌分离诊疗研究进展[J]. 赣南医学院学报, 2023, 43(3): 315-320.
  ZHENG J M, REN L, ZHANG P Y, et al. Advances in diagnosis and treatment of rectus abdominis separation[J]. J Gann Med Univ, 2023, 43(3): 315-320.
[18] 付鹏, 江凌, 崔立刚. 高频超声在产后女性腹直肌分离评估中的应用价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2021, 18(1): 79-83.
  FU P, JIANG L, CUI L G. Value of high frequency ultrasound in evaluation of diastasis recti abdominis in postpartum women[J]. Chin J Med Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2021, 18(1): 79-83.
[19] 侯丽红, 蔡晓婷, 邱惠君. 高频彩超联合经腹超声在产后女性腹直肌分离诊断中的应用价值分析[J]. 现代诊断与治疗, 2023, 34(8): 1210-1212.
  HOU L H, CAI X T, QIU H J. Analysis of the application value of high-frequency ultrasound combined with transabdominal ultrasound in the diagnosis of dissociation rectus abdominis in postpartum women[J]. Mod Diagn Treat, 2023, 34(8): 1210-1212.
[20] 江庆, 顾军, 冯冠男, 等. 产后42-60 d腹直肌间距的超声参考值范围[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2021, 18(11): 1067-1072.
  JIANG Q, GU J, FENG G N, et al. Reference range of inter-recti distance measured by ultrasonography at 42-60 days postpartum[J]. Chin J Med Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2021, 18(11): 1067-1072.
[21] LIN J, SONG C X, QUE K X, et al. Real-time ultrasound feedback of transversus abdominis muscle activation on postpartum diastasis recti abdminis[J]. Chin J Clin Res, 2023, 36(5):698-703.
Outlines

/