The effect of epidural analgesia on rates of episiotomy use and episiotomy extension in an inner-city hospital

Objective : To determine the relationship between epidural analgesia and episiotomy usage and episiotomy extension in parturients delivering vaginally. Methods : A database of 20 888 women experiencing spontaneous vaginal delivery at Grady Memorial Hospital from 1990 to 1995 was examined to identify those receiving epidural analgesia. Patients who underwent epidural catheter placement and had adequate perineal anesthesia at delivery comprised the epidural group, and all others comprised the control group. Demographic characteristics and obstetric outcomes were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to test the association between epidural analgesia, rates of episiotomy and episiotomy extension. Results : Of the 20 888 women experiencing spontaneous vaginal deliveries 6785 (32.5%) received epidural analgesia. Women receiving epidural analgesia were more likely than those not receiving epidural analgesia to be African-American and nulliparous, and to have an occiput posterior presentation. Women receiving epidural analgesia were also more likely to receive an episiotomy (27.8% vs. 13.1%, odds ratio (OR) 2.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.38-2.75) and were less likely to experience a second-degree perineal laceration (11.6% vs. 14.4%, OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.69-0.82) or a third- or fourth-degree extension (8.9% vs. 12.4%, OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97). When the results were adjusted for nulliparity, posterior presentation, macrosomia, shoulder dystocia and prolonged second stage, epidural analgesia remained independently associated with receipt of episiotomy (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.88-2.06) and reduced episiotomy extension (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.54-0.94). Conclusion : Epidural analgesia increases the rates of episiotomy use, and decreases the rate of episiotomy extension, independently of clinical factors associated with episiotomy.     

Cohort study of maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to use of episiotomy at instrumental vaginal delivery

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the maternal and neonatal morbidity related to use of episiotomy for vacuum and forceps deliveries. DESIGN: Retrospective population-based cohort study. SETTING: Dundee, Scotland. POPULATION: Two thousand one hundred and fifty three women who experienced an instrumental vaginal delivery between January 1998 and December 2002. METHODS: Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed comparing deliveries with and without the use of episiotomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extensive perineal tears (third and fourth degree) and shoulder dystocia. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-one (11%) of the 2153 women who underwent instrumental vaginal deliveries did not receive an episiotomy. Vacuum delivery was associated with less use of episiotomy compared with forceps (odds ratio 0.10, 95% CI 0.07-0.14). Extensive perineal tears were more likely with use of episiotomy (7.5%vs 2.5%, adjusted OR 2.92, 95% CI 1.27-6.72) as was neonatal trauma (6.0%vs 1.7%, adjusted OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.05-6.54). Use of episiotomy did not reduce the risk of shoulder dystocia (6.9%vs 4.6%, adjusted OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.74-2.76). The findings were similar for delivery by vacuum and forceps. CONCLUSION: The use of episiotomy increased the risk of extensive perineal tears without a reduction in the risk of shoulder dystocia.     

Epidural analgesia and third- or fourth-degree lacerations in nulliparas.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if epidural analgesia is associated with differences in rates of severe perineal trauma during vaginal deliveries. METHODS: We studied 1942 consecutive, low-risk, term, vaginal deliveries in nulliparas, including spontaneous and induced labors, at a single institution from December 1994 to August 1995. The rate of third- and fourth-degree lacerations was compared for women who had and did not have epidural analgesia for labor-pain relief. Statistical significance was determined using chi2. Logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate associations while controlling for possible confounding variables. RESULTS: Overall rates of third- and fourth-degree lacerations were 10.8% (n = 210) and 3.4% (n = 63), respectively. Epidural analgesia was given to 1376 (70.9%) women. Among women who had epidurals, 16.1% (221 of 1376) had severe perineal lacerations compared with 9.7% (n = 55) of the 566 women who did not have epidurals (P < .001; odds ratio [OR] 1.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3, 2.4). When controlling for birth weight, use of oxytocin, and maternal age in logistic regression analysis, epidural remained a significant predictor of severe perineal injury (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0, 2.0). Epidural use is consistently associated with increased operative vaginal deliveries and consequent episiotomies, so we constructed a logistic regression model to evaluate whether the higher rates of those procedures were responsible for the effect of epidurals on severe perineal traumas. With operative vaginal delivery and episiotomy in the model, epidural was no longer an independent predictor of perineal injury (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.6, 1.3). CONCLUSION: Epidural analgesia is associated with an increase in the rate of severe perineal trauma because of the more frequent use of operative vaginal delivery and episiotomy.     

Predictors of episiotomy use at first spontaneous vaginal delivery

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with the use of episiotomy at spontaneous vaginal delivery. METHODS: We studied 1576 consecutive term, singleton, spontaneous vaginal deliveries in nulliparas at Brigham & Women's Hospital between December 1, 1994 and July 31, 1995. The association of demographic variables and obstetric factors with the rate of episiotomy use were examined. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and confidence intervals (CI) were estimated from multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The overall rate of episiotomy was 40.6% (640 of 1576). Midwives performed episiotomies at a lower rate (21.4%) than faculty (33.3%) and private providers (55.6%) (P =. 001). After controlling for confounding factors with logistic regression, private practice provider was the strongest predictor of episiotomy use (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 3.1, 5.4) followed by faculty provider (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1, 2.5), prolonged second stage of labor (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2, 2.7), fetal macrosomia (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1, 2.5), and epidural analgesia (OR 1.4, 95% CI, 1.1, 1.8). CONCLUSION: The strongest factor associated with episiotomy at delivery was the category of obstetric provider. Obstetric and demographic factors evaluated did not readily explain this association.     

Need for episiotomy in a subsequent delivery following previous delivery with episiotomy

Purpose

To assess the need of episiotomy in a subsequent delivery in women with previous primiparous vaginal delivery with episiotomy.

Methods

In this historical prospective study, we followed primiparous women who had an episiotomy at a normal vaginal delivery. The study group included parturient women (n = 201) who underwent an episiotomy at a vaginal delivery during a 2-year period (2001–2002). Inclusion criteria were: primiparity, term singleton vaginal delivery, episiotomy, and a subsequent vaginal delivery in Edith Wolfson Medical Center. Exclusion criteria were instrumental delivery at the index delivery, preterm delivery or twins at the subsequent delivery. Episiotomy in the enrolled parturient women was done when it is thought that failure to perform episiotomy would result in perineal tears. The control group (n = 201) was formed from the same time period and included women who had a spontaneous vaginal delivery without episiotomy.

Results

Of the 201 women with episiotomy at the index delivery, 48 (23.9 %) had episiotomy at the subsequent delivery compared to only 20 women (10.0 %) out of the 201 women without an episiotomy at index delivery (p < 0.05). Having an episiotomy at the index delivery significantly increased odds of a subsequent episiotomy (OR 2.84, 95 % CI 1.62–4.99, p < 0.05) and the risk of spontaneous perineal tears (59.2 vs. 23.4 %, p < 0.05) at the subsequent delivery.

Conclusion

Episiotomy at first vaginal delivery significantly and independently increased the risk of repeated episiotomy and spontaneous perineal tears in a subsequent delivery.     

Factors predicting severe perineal trauma during childbirth: role of forceps delivery routinely combined with mediolateral episiotomy

OBJECTIVE: Anal sphincter injury and its sequelae are a recognized complication of vaginal childbirth. The aim of the present study was to identify risk factors for third- and fourth-degree perineal tears in patients undergoing either spontaneous or vaginal-assisted delivery by forceps routinely combined with mediolateral episiotomy. STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively reviewed 5377 vaginal deliveries based on the analysis of the obstetric database and patient records of our department during a 5-year period from 1999 to 2003. Cases and control subjects were chosen randomly and patients' records were reviewed for the following variables: maternal age, parity, gestational age, tobacco use, gestational diabetes or pregnancy-induced hypertension, use of peridural anesthesia, duration of first and second stages of labor, use of mediolateral episiotomy, forceps combined with mediolateral episiotomy, induction of labor, infant head diameter, shoulder circumference, and birth weight. RESULTS: Of 5044 spontaneous vaginal deliveries 32 (0.6%) and of 333 assisted vaginal deliveries 14 (4.2%) patients sustained a perineal defect involving the external sphincter. An univariate analysis of these 46 cases and 155 randomly selected control subjects showed that low parity (P = .003; Mann-Whitney U test), prolonged first and second stages of labor (P = .001, P = .001), high birth weight (P = .031), episiotomy (P = .004; Fisher exact test), and forceps delivery (P = .002) increased the risk for sphincter damage. In multivariate regression models, only high birth weight (P = .004; odds ratio [OR] 1.68, 1.18-2.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]), and forceps delivery combined with mediolateral episiotomies (P < .001; OR 5.62, 2.16-14.62, 95% CI) proved to be independent risk factors. There was a statistical significant interaction of birth weight and head circumference (P = .012; OR 0.99, 0.98-0.99, 95% CI). Although the use of episiotomy conferred an increased risk toward a higher likelihood of severe perineal trauma, it did not reach statistical significance (P = .06; OR 2.15, 0.97-4.76, 95% CI). CONCLUSIONS: In consistence with previous reports, women who are vaginally delivered of a large infant are at a high risk for sphincter damage. Although the rate of these complications was surprisingly low in vaginally assisted childbirth, the use of forceps, even if routinely combined with mediolateral episiotomy, should be minimized whenever possible.     

Trends in major modifiable risk factors for severe perineal trauma, 1996–2006

OBJECTIVE: To examine what effect the major modifiable risk factors for severe perineal trauma have had on the rates of this trauma over time. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study of singleton vaginal deliveries taken from a perinatal database for the period 1996 through 2006. RESULTS: A total of 46,239 singleton vertex vaginal deliveries met the inclusion criteria. Major risk factors for severe perineal trauma were increased maternal age (odds ratio [OR] 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-1.5), non-African American ethnicity (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.7), nulliparity (OR 4.8, 95% CI 4.11-5.6), fetal birth weight (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.9-2.4), forceps (OR 8.3, 95% CI 5.4-10.8), vacuum (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.9-4.4), and midline episiotomy (OR 5.7, 95% CI 5.0-6.4). Evaluation of the changes in rates of these factors over the study period revealed that the decline in the rates of episiotomy and the use of forceps accounted for a reduction in severe lacerations of more than 50%. CONCLUSION: Reduction of severe perineal trauma by restricted use of the 2 modifiable clinical variables, episiotomy and forceps, is evident over time.     

A prospective randomised trial on the effect of position in the passive second stage of labour on birth outcome in nulliparous women using epidural analgesia

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the rate of instrumental birth in nulliparous women using epidural analgesia is affected by maternal position in the passive second stage of labour. DESIGN: A pragmatic prospective randomised trial. SETTING: Consultant maternity unit in the Midlands. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and seven nulliparous women using epidural analgesia and reaching the second stage of labour with no contraindications to spontaneous birth. INTERVENTIONS: The lateral versus the supported sitting position during the passive second stage of labour. MEASUREMENTS: Mode of birth, incidence of episiotomy, and perineal suturing. FINDINGS: Recruitment was lower than anticipated (107 vs. 220 planned). Lateral position was associated with lower rates of instrumental birth rate (lateral group 33%; sitting group 52%; p=0.05, RR 0.64, CI for RR: 0.40-1.01; Number-needed-to-treat (NNT)=5), of episiotomy (45% vs. 64%; p=0.05, RR 0.66, CI for RR: 0.44-1.00, NNT=5), and of perineal suturing (78% vs. 86%; p=0.243, RR 0.75, CI for RR 0.47-1.17). The odds ratio for instrumental birth in the sitting group was 2.2 (CI 1.00-4.6). Logistic regression of potential confounder variables was undertaken, due to a large variation in maternal weight between the randomised groups. Of the nine possible confounders tested, only position of the baby's head at full dilation affected the risk of instrumental birth significantly (p=0.4, OR 2.7 where the fetal head was in the lateral or posterior position). Maternal weight did not appear to have any effect. The odds ratio for instrumental delivery for women randomised to the sitting position was slightly higher within the logistic regression model (adjusted OR 2.3). KEY CONCLUSIONS: Women randomised to the lateral position had a better chance of a spontaneous vaginal birth than those randomised to the supported sitting position. Position of the babies head at full dilation had an additional effect on mode of birth. These effects are not conclusively generalizable. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The lateral position is likely to be at best beneficial, and at the worst no less harmful than the sitting position for most women and their babies who meet the criteria set for this study. Conclusive evidence for or against the technique should be established using larger trials.     

Prior third- or fourth-degree perineal tears and recurrence risks.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study is to determine the recurrence risk of a third-degree (into the anal sphincter) or a fourth-degree (into the rectum) perineal tear in women with a prior extensive laceration. METHODS: Data were gathered from our computerized perinatal database between January 1990 and December 1994. Women who had two consecutive singleton deliveries were chosen as subjects. RESULTS: The rate of an extensive perineal laceration was greater if a tear had occurred in a previous pregnancy (19 of 178 cases, 10.7% vs. 56% of 1563 cases, 3.6%, odds ratio 3.4. A 95% confidence interval: 1.8-6.4; p < 0.0001). A prior tear remained a risk factor after controlling for other variables (epidural analgesia, episiotomy, oxytocin use, operative vaginal delivery, fetal macrosomia). CONCLUSION: A prior third-degree or fourth-degree perineal tear is associated with a 3.4-fold increased risk of a recurrent severe obstetrical laceration.     

Decreased anal sphincter lacerations associated with restrictive episiotomy use

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether restrictive episiotomy use was associated with decreases in anal sphincter lacerations and the risk of anal sphincter laceration attributable to episiotomy. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective database study. Rates of episiotomy, anal sphincter laceration (third- or fourth-degree tear), and other confounding variables were compared among vaginal deliveries before (1999) and after (2002) restrictive episiotomy use was implemented at our institution. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio of anal sphincter laceration that was due to episiotomy and other variables. RESULTS: The episiotomy rate decreased 56% (37% to 17%, P < .001) between 1999 and 2002, whereas the anal sphincter laceration rate decreased 44% (9.7% to 5.4%, P < .001). There were no changes in age, race, nulliparity, prolonged second stage of labor, operative vaginal deliveries, birth weight, or macrosomia, although oxytocin use and epidural use decreased slightly (37% to 31%, P < .001, and 80% to 76%, P = .02, respectively). The adjusted odds ratio of anal sphincter laceration attributable to episiotomy decreased 55%, from 6.5 (95% CI: 3.8, 11.1) to 2.9 (95% CI: 1.7, 5.0), between 1999 and 2002. Conversely, the adjusted odds ratios of anal sphincter laceration attributable to the other independent risk factors all increased or remained the same: operative vaginal delivery, which increased from 4.4 (95% CI: 2.7, 6.9) to 6.3 (95% CI: 3.6 11.1); nulliparity, from 2.9 (95% CI: 1.8, 4.8) to 2.9 (95% CI: 1.4, 5.9); macrosomia, from 1.9 (95% CI: 1.1, 3.4) to 2.6 (95% CI: 1.3, 5.4); and prolonged second stage, from 2.0 (95% CI: 1.3, 3.0) to 2.1 (95% CI: 1.2, 3.7). CONCLUSION: With restrictive episiotomy use, the episiotomy rate, anal sphincter laceration rate, and risk of anal sphincter laceration attributable to episiotomy were all reduced by approximately 50%.     

Perineal Injury in Nulliparous Women Giving Birth at a Community Hospital: Reduced Risk in Births Attended by Certified Nurse‐Midwives

Introduction : Our objective was to determine if there is a difference in rates of perineal injury sustained by nulliparous women attended by obstetricians compared with certified nurse‐midwives (CNMs) at a US community hospital. Methods : We analyzed retrospective data for 2819 women who spontaneously gave birth to singleton, vertex, term, live infants between 2000 and 2005. The independent variable was attendant type (obstetrician or CNM). The main outcome variables were intact perineum, episiotomy, and spontaneous perineal lacerations. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for six potential confounders: macrosomia, maternal age, epidural anesthesia, oxytocin administration, medical insurance status, and ethnicity. Results : The odds ratios (ORs) for obstetrician‐attended births versus CNM‐attended births were significant for a spontaneous minor perineal laceration versus intact perineum (OR = 1.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33–2.48), spontaneous major laceration versus intact perineum (OR = 2.29; 95% CI, 1.13–4.66), and episiotomy use versus no perineal injury, with or without extension (OR = 2.94; 95% CI, 2.01–4.29). Discussion : We found that the prevalence and severity of perineal injury, both spontaneous and from episiotomy use, were significantly lower in CNM‐attended births. J Midwifery Womens Health 2010;55:243–249 c̊ 2010 by the American College of Nurse‐Midwives.     

Effect of epidural analgesia on operative vaginal birth rate

The aim of the study was to investigate if epidural analgesia may affect the operative vaginal birth rate. An observational study was carried out on 1,158 in low-risk patients who delivered vaginally; 46.9% of these patients underwent epidural analgesia using different doses and drugs. Overall, epidural analgesia enhanced the probability of vacuum delivery (OR 2.70 95% CI 1.88-3.89, p < 0.001). Vacuum application was increased about seven times by administration of fentanyl alone at the first dose, while it was reduced if ropivacaine was added to fentanyl. In patients undergoing epidural analgesia, increasing the amount of ropivacaine at the first dose reduced the probability of vacuum delivery (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.67-1.00, p = 0.05). Moreover, increasing the number of top-ups reduced the probability of vacuum delivery (OR 0.49 95% CI 0.27-0.93, p = 0.029) and the time of the second stage of labor. On the other hand, increasing time from the first dose of epidural to the last top-up increased the risk of operative vaginal delivery (OR 1.33 95% CI 1.03-1.72, p = 0.031) and the time of the second stage of labor. Epidural analgesia seems to favor spontaneous delivery when it is properly carried on.     

Impact of Episiotomy During Operative Vaginal Delivery on Obstetrical Anal Sphincter Injuries

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to describe associations between episiotomy at the time of forceps or vacuum-assisted delivery and obstetrical anal sphincter injuries (OASIS).MethodsThis population-based retrospective cohort study used delivery information from a provincial perinatal clinical database. Full-term, singleton, in-hospital, operative vaginal deliveries of vertex-presenting infants from April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2016 were identified. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between episiotomy and third- or fourth-degree lacerations were calculated in multiple logistic regression models (Canadian Task Force Classification II-2).ResultsEpisiotomy was performed in 34% of 52 241 operative vaginal deliveries. OASIS occurred in 21% of forceps deliveries and 7.6% of vacuum deliveries. Episiotomy was associated with increased odds of severe perineal lacerations for vacuum deliveries among women with (OR 2.48; 95% CI 1.96–3.13) and without (OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.02–1.22) a prior vaginal delivery. Among forceps deliveries, episiotomy was associated with increased odds of OASIS for those with a previous vaginal delivery (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.12–2.06), but it was protective for women with no previous vaginal delivery (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.67–0.79). Midline compared with mediolateral episiotomy increased the odds of OASIS in forceps deliveries (OR 2.73; 95% CI 2.37–3.13) and vacuum deliveries (OR 1.94; 95% CI 1.65–2.28).ConclusionIn conclusion, results suggest that episiotomy should be used with caution, particularly among women with a previous vaginal delivery and in the setting of vacuum-assisted delivery. Episiotomy may protect against OASIS in forceps-assisted deliveries for women without a prior vaginal delivery.     

会阴切开术对产后的影响

目的 回顾分析足月自然产会阴侧切开术和会阴裂伤对产后的影响。方法 我院2012年1月至12月182例足月孕妇会阴侧切开术92例和会阴裂伤90例,比较伤口出血量和手术时间,切口延伸、愈合率和裂开,伤口肿胀、触痛和硬结,采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评估术中、术后疼痛和产痛的比较,产后日常活动对母乳喂养的影响,产后盆底的检查。结果 ① 伤口出血量裂伤组低于侧切组,有统计学性意义[(33.2±6.0)mlvs (53.2±8.8)ml,P <0.05];缝合时间裂伤组短于侧切组,有统计学意义[(13.2±3.0)minvs (16.2±2.2)min,P <0.05];② 切口延伸、伤口愈合率和裂开两组无统计学意义(P >0.05);产后会阴伤口肿胀(38% vs22.2%)、触痛(63.8% vs17.8%)、硬结(53.3% vs12.2%),会阴侧切组明显高于会阴裂伤组,有统计学意义(P <0.01);③ 侧切组术后疼痛VAS评分比裂伤组高,有统计学意义(P <0.05),术中疼痛和产痛两组无统计学意义(P >0.05),两组均表现为产痛>术后疼痛>术中疼痛。术后疼痛对产妇影响依次坐、行、排便、睡眠、排尿、翻身活动;④ 产后母乳喂养会阴侧切组在产后第三天100%母乳喂养,裂伤组产后第二天100%母乳喂养,有统计学性意义(P <0.05);⑤ 产后盆底的检查两组比较无统计学意义(P >0.05)。结论会阴切开术没有降低损伤的发生,反而增加产后疼痛。     

The effect of epidural analgesia on the occurrence of obstetric lacerations and on the neonatal outcome during spontaneous vaginal delivery

The aim of this study was to determine if epidural analgesia is associated with increased risk of obstetric lacerations during spontaneous vaginal delivery. Furthermore we assessed the effect of epidural analgesia on maternal and neonatal parameters. This multicenter study consisted of an analysis of data from the delivery databases of the University Hospital of Vienna and the Semmelweis Women's Hospital Vienna. This study was restricted to a sample that included all women with uncomplicated pregnancy, a gestational age >37(th) weeks and a pregnancy with cephalic presentation. Epidural analgesia was set during the first stage of labour. Techniques and management styles of epidural analgesia were the same in both hospitals. No statistically significant association was found between epidural analgesia and the occurrence of perineal tears (p=0.83), vaginal (p=0.37) or labial trauma (p=0.11). Furthermore the results demonstrated a statistically significant higher rate of primiparous women using epidural analgesia (p=0.001). A statistically significant prolonged second stage of labour was observed in women undergoing epidural analgesia (p=0.0001). Episiotomy was statistically significant more frequent in women requiring epidural analgesia (p=0.0001). Women who were treated with epidural analgesia were more likely to have labour augmented with oxytocin (p=0.001). No statistically significant differences in neonatal outcomes determined by APGAR score (p=0.84) and cord pH (p=0.23) were observed between the two groups. Women undergoing epidural analgesia demonstrated a prolonged second stage of labour, a higher rate of episiotomy and an increased use of oxytocin to augment labour. Some of these adverse effects might be caused by the higher rate of primiparous women using epidural analgesia. However, epidural analgesia showed no evidence of a detrimental effect on the integrity of the birth-canal in spontaneous vaginal delivery. In our opinion it is a save and effective method of pain relief during labour.     

The role of mediolateral episiotomy during labour: analysis of risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter tears

BACKGROUND: To determine risk factors for third-degree and complete third- or fourth-degree anal sphincter tears in vaginal delivery. METHODS: This is a retrospective comparative study. Fifty-three women who had sustained an anal sphincter tear were compared with 9,178 women without such a complication between August 1997 and October 2001. Obstetric data was collected from an electronic database. The main outcome measures were odds ratios. RESULTS: In the whole study population, odds ratios (ORs) for third-degree tears were: primiparity, 8.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.98-17.48); vacuum extraction, 5.22 (95% CI 2.69-10.13); parietal presentation, 3.97 (95% CI 1.16-13.64); and birth weight >4,000 g, 3.77 (95% CI 2.11-6.68); and for complete third- or fourth-degree tears odds ratios were 5.42, 2.98, 5.64, and 3.01, respectively. In multivariate analysis, mediolateral episiotomy appeared to be protective as regards third-degree tears (OR 0.37 [95% CI 0.2020-0.70]). CONCLUSIONS: Vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery bears an increased risk of third-degree anal sphincter tears in a maternity unit where forceps are not used. Restricted use of mediolateral episiotomy may have a protective effect on the perineum.     

Risk factors for anal sphincter tear during vaginal delivery

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors associated with anal sphincter tear during vaginal delivery and to identify opportunities for preventing this cause of fecal incontinence in young women. METHODS: We used baseline data from two groups of women who participated in the Childbirth and Pelvic Symptoms (CAPS) study: those women who delivered vaginally, either those with or those without a recognized anal sphincter tear. Univariable analyses of demographic and obstetric information identified factors associated with anal sphincter tear. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for these factors alone and in combination, adjusted for maternal age, race, and gestational age. RESULTS: We included data from 797 primaparous women: 407 with a recognized anal sphincter tear and 390 without. Based on univariable analysis, a woman with a sphincter tear was more likely to be older, to be white, to have longer gestation or prolonged second stage of labor, to have a larger infant (birth weight/head circumference), or an infant who was in occiput posterior position, or to have an episiotomy or operative delivery. Logistic regression found forceps delivery (OR 13.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.9-23.2) and episiotomy (OR 5.3, 95% CI 3.8-7.6) were strongly associated with a sphincter tear. The combination of forceps and episiotomy was markedly associated with sphincter tear (OR 25.3, 95% CI 10.2-62.6). The addition of epidural anesthesia to forceps and episiotomy increased the OR to 41.0 (95% CI 13.5-124.4). CONCLUSION: Our results highlight the existence of modifiable obstetric interventions that increase the risk of anal sphincter tear during vaginal delivery. Our results may be used by clinicians and women to help inform their decisions regarding obstetric interventions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.     

Mode of Delivery after Epidural Analgesia in a Cohort of Low‐Risk Nulliparas

Abstract: Background: Although epidural analgesia is widespread and very effective for alleviating labor pain, its use is still controversial, as the literature is inconsistent about the risk of adverse birth outcome after administration of epidural analgesia. The aim of this study was to explore associations between epidural analgesia and mode of delivery. Methods: Data were obtained from a prospective cohort from nine Danish labor wards and comprised 2,721 term nulliparous women with spontaneous onset of labor and a singleton fetus in cephalic presentation. Information about epidural analgesia, mode of delivery, and birth complications was obtained by the staff attending labor. Additional information was provided from self‐administered questionnaires in gestational week 37. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the association between epidural analgesia and birth outcomes. Results are presented as crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR [95% CI]). Results: Of the total cohort, 21.6 percent required epidural analgesia, 8.7 percent had emergency cesarean section, and 14.9 percent had vacuum extraction. Women with epidural analgesia had a higher risk of emergency cesarean section (adjusted OR: 5.8; 95% CI: 4.1–8.1), and vacuum extraction (adjusted OR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3–2.2). In a subgroup of the cohort with a very low overall risk of cesarean section, 3.4 percent had emergency cesarean section and an increased risk of emergency cesarean section was also found in this group (adjusted OR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.5–8.2). Conclusions: In nulliparous women of a very low‐risk population, use of epidural analgesia for labor pain was associated with higher risks of emergency cesarean section and vacuum extraction. (BIRTH 38:4 December 2011)     

Clinical evaluation of peripartum outcomes of mediolateral versus lateral episiotomy

Objective

To evaluate the incidence and extent of vaginal and perineal trauma among primiparous women after mediolateral and lateral episiotomy.

Methods

In a prospective randomized study at University Hospital Pilsen, Czech Republic, 790 consecutive primiparous women were enrolled between April 2010 and April 2012. Mediolateral episiotomy (MLE) followed an angle of at least 60° from the midline. Lateral episiotomy (LE) started 1–2 cm laterally from the midline and was directed toward the ischial tuberosity. A rectal examination was performed before episiotomy repair.

Results

MLE was performed for 390 women, and LE for 400. The groups did not differ in maternal or neonatal characteristics. No difference was found in incidence or extent of vaginal and perineal trauma; or in additional perineal (1.8% vs 1.5%, P = 0.6) or vaginal (8.5% vs 10.6%, P = 0.2) trauma continuing along the episiotomy incision. The incidence of anal sphincter injury did not differ between MLE and LE (1.5% vs 1.3%, P = 0.7). MLE was associated with shorter repair times (P < 0.05), less suturing material (P < 0.05), and shorter distances from the anus (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Risk of additional vaginal and perineal trauma, and anal sphincter injury after adequately performed mediolateral episiotomy is relatively low and corresponds to that of lateral episiotomy.     

Does meperidine analgesia affect the incidence of obstetric lacerations at vaginal delivery?

Purpose: To study whether meperidine analgesia affects the incidence of obstetric lacerations at normal vaginal deliveries.

Materials and methods: A retrospective cohort study of all women with term vertex singleton pregnancies, who underwent normal vaginal deliveries, in a single tertiary hospital, between 2011 and 2015, was performed. The incidence of various obstetric lacerations was compared between deliveries with meperidine analgesia and deliveries with no analgesia. Deliveries with epidural analgesia and instrumental deliveries were excluded. An intravenous infusion of 75?mg of meperidine was administered together with 25?mg of promethazine. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between meperidine analgesia and obstetric lacerations, after controlling for confounders.

Results: Overall, 5227 (91.8%) deliveries with no analgesia and 466 (8.1%) deliveries with meperidine analgesia were included. Meperidine analgesia was associated with a decreased risk of first- and second-degree perineal lacerations (adjusted OR?=?0.63, 95% CI?=?0.49–0.81), and a decreased risk of any suturing (adjusted OR?=?0.73, 95% CI?=?0.59–0.91), after controlling for confounders. Meperidine analgesia did not affect the risk of severe perineal lacerations or episiotomies.

Conclusion: Meperidine analgesia may have a protective effect against first- and second-degree perineal lacerations.