Pattern of activation of pelvic floor muscles in men differs with verbal instructions.

AIMS: To investigate the effect of instruction on activation of pelvic floor muscles (PFM) in men as quantified by transperineal ultrasound imaging (US) and to validate these measures with invasive EMG recordings. METHODS: Displacement of pelvic floor landmarks on transperineal US, intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) recorded with a nasogastric transducer, and surface EMG of the abdominal muscles and anal sphincter were recorded in 15 healthy men during sub-maximal PFM contractions in response to different verbal instructions: "tighten around the anus," "elevate the bladder," "shorten the penis," and "stop the flow of urine." In three men, fine-wire EMG recordings were made from puborectalis and bulbocavernosus, and trans-urethral EMG recordings from the striated urethral sphincter (SUS). Displacement data were validated by analysis of relationship with invasive EMG. Displacement, IAP, and abdominal/anal EMG were compared between instructions. RESULTS: Displacement of pelvic landmarks correlated with the EMG of the muscles predicted anatomically to affect their locations. Greatest dorsal displacement of the mid-urethra and SUS activity was achieved with the instruction "shorten the penis." Instruction to "elevate the bladder" induced the greatest increase in abdominal EMG and IAP. "Tighten around the anus" induced greatest anal sphincter activity. CONCLUSIONS: The pattern of urethral movement measured from transperineal US is influenced by the instructions used to teach activation of the pelvic floor muscles in men. Efficacy of PFM training may depend on the instructions used to train activation. Instructions that optimize activation of muscles with a potential to increase urethral pressure without increasing abdominal EMG/IAP are likely ideal. Neurourol. Urodynam. 35:457-463, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Validity of Estimation of Pelvic Floor Muscle Activity from Transperineal Ultrasound Imaging in Men.

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between displacement of pelvic floor landmarks observed with transperineal ultrasound imaging and electromyography of the muscles hypothesised to cause the displacements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three healthy men participated in this study, which included ultrasound imaging of the mid-urethra, urethra-vesical junction, ano-rectal junction and bulb of the penis. Fine-wire electromyography electrodes were inserted into the puborectalis and bulbocavernosus muscles and a transurethral catheter electrode recorded striated urethral sphincter electromyography. A nasogastric sensor recorded intra-abdominal pressure. Tasks included submaximal and maximal voluntary contractions, and Valsalva. The relationship between each of the parameters measured from ultrasound images and electromyography or intra-abdominal pressure amplitudes was described with nonlinear regression. RESULTS: Strong, non-linear relationships were calculated for each predicted landmark/muscle pair for submaximal contractions (R2-0.87-0.95). The relationships between mid-urethral displacement and striated urethral sphincter electromyography, and bulb of the penis displacement and bulbocavernosus electromyography were strong during maximal contractions (R2-0.74-0.88). Increased intra-abdominal pressure prevented shortening of puborectalis, which resulted in weak relationships between electromyography and anorectal and urethravesical junction displacement during all tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Displacement of landmarks in transperineal ultrasound imaging provides meaningful measures of activation of individual pelvic floor muscles in men during voluntary contractions. This method may aid assessment of muscle function or feedback for training.