OBJECTIVE: To define normal perineal body length during labor and determine if a shortened perineal body is associated with perineal lacerations or operative vaginal delivery. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed charts of patients admitted for labor over a 4-month period. The perineal body was measured by the admitting physician and delivery outcomes obtained from inpatient records. Patients were excluded for malpresentation, multiple gestation, gestational age < 36 weeks, incomplete records and scheduled cesarean delivery. To determine if differences existed between patients with perineal body measurements available and those without, chi2 analysis was used, with P<.05 considered significant. Multiple logistic regression was used to control for confounding variables and determine if a shortened perineal body affected the incidence of operative vaginal delivery and significant lacerations at vaginal delivery. RESULTS: A total of 234 patients met our inclusion criteria; perineal body measurements were available for 133 (57%). The average perineal body length was 3.90 cm (+/-0.70). Patients with a perineal body of < or = 2.5 cm had a significantly higher chance of sustaining a third- or fourth-degree laceration (40% vs. 5.6%, P=.004). This risk remained after controlling for both operative vaginal delivery and episiotomy. The incidence of operative vaginal delivery was greater (28.5% vs. 9.2%, P =.006) for patients with a perineal body < or = 3.5 cm. CONCLUSION: There is an increased risk of significant lacerations and operative vaginal delivery in patients with a shortened perineal body.
OBJECTIVE: To define normal perineal body length during labor and determine if a shortened perineal body is associated with perineal lacerations or operative vaginal delivery. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed charts of patients admitted for labor over a 4-month period. The perineal body was measured by the admitting physician and delivery outcomes obtained from inpatient records. Patients were excluded for malpresentation, multiple gestation, gestational age < 36 weeks, incomplete records and scheduled cesarean delivery. To determine if differences existed between patients with perineal body measurements available and those without, chi2 analysis was used, with P<.05 considered significant. Multiple logistic regression was used to control for confounding variables and determine if a shortened perineal body affected the incidence of operative vaginal delivery and significant lacerations at vaginal delivery. RESULTS: A total of 234 patients met our inclusion criteria; perineal body measurements were available for 133 (57%). The average perineal body length was 3.90 cm (+/-0.70). Patients with a perineal body of < or = 2.5 cm had a significantly higher chance of sustaining a third- or fourth-degree laceration (40% vs. 5.6%, P=.004). This risk remained after controlling for both operative vaginal delivery and episiotomy. The incidence of operative vaginal delivery was greater (28.5% vs. 9.2%, P =.006) for patients with a perineal body < or = 3.5 cm. CONCLUSION: There is an increased risk of significant lacerations and operative vaginal delivery in patients with a shortened perineal body.
Authors: Anh T Trinh; Amina Khambalia; Amanda Ampt; Jonathan M Morris; Christine L Roberts Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: E J Geller; B L Robinson; C A Matthews; K P Celauro; G C Dunivan; A K Crane; A R Ivins; P C Woodham; J R Fielding Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Kate V Meriwether; Rebecca G Rogers; Gena C Dunivan; Jill K Alldredge; Clifford Qualls; Laura Migliaccio; Lawrence Leeman Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-02-13 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Luis C Moya-Jiménez; María L Sánchez-Ferrer; Evdochia Adoamnei; Jaime Mendiola Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2018-08-23 Impact factor: 2.894