Literature DB >> 24431617

A prospective randomized study comparing maternal and fetal effects of forceps delivery and vacuum extraction.

Shashank Shekhar1, Neena Rana2, Ranbir Singh Jaswal3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare maternal and neonatal effects of assisted vaginal delivery by forceps and vacuum extraction.
METHODS: A prospective randomized study. One hundred eligible women requiring assisted vaginal delivery in the second stage of labor were randomized to deliver by forceps or vacuum extraction.
RESULTS: All of those allocated to forceps delivery actually delivered with the allocated instrument (100 % delivery rate in forceps vs. 90 % in VE); however, maternal trauma (40 % in forceps vs. 10 % in VE, p < 0.001), use of analgesia (p < 0.001), and blood loss at delivery (234 ml in VE vs. 337 ml in forceps group, p < 0.05) were significantly less in the group allocated to deliver by vacuum extraction. Vacuum extraction, however, appears to predispose to an increase in neonatal jaundice and incidence of cephalhematoma. More serious neonatal morbidity was rare in both groups.
CONCLUSION: Extrapolation of the data from the study reveals that there is a significant reduction in maternal injuries. However, vacuum extraction has the potential to injure babies more.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Comparative morbidity; Obstetric forceps; Outcome; Vacuum extractor

Year:  2012        PMID: 24431617      PMCID: PMC3664693          DOI: 10.1007/s13224-012-0282-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India        ISSN: 0975-6434


  13 in total

1.  Neonatal and maternal complications among pregnant women delivered by vacuum extraction or forceps extraction.

Authors:  E Kovavisarach; T Varanuntakul
Journal:  J Med Assoc Thai       Date:  1999-04

2.  North Staffordshire/Wigan assisted delivery trial.

Authors:  R Johanson; J Pusey; N Livera; P Jones
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1989-05

3.  Vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery.

Authors:  Unzila A Ali; Errol R Norwitz
Journal:  Rev Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009

4.  Cohort study of Silastic obstetric vacuum cup deliveries: II. Unsuccessful vacuum extraction.

Authors:  M D Berkus; R S Ramamurthy; P S O'Connor; K J Brown; R H Hayashi
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Comparison of maternal and neonatal morbidity in midforceps delivery and midpelvis vacuum extraction.

Authors:  W C Baerthlein; S Moodley; S K Stinson
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Vacuum extraction versus forceps delivery: indications and complications, 1979 to 1984.

Authors:  F F Broekhuizen; J M Washington; F Johnson; P R Hamilton
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Risk of new-onset urinary incontinence after forceps and vacuum delivery in primiparous women.

Authors:  L A Arya; N D Jackson; D L Myers; A Verma
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 8.  The role of vacuum extraction in modern obstetrics.

Authors:  M J Lucas
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 2.190

9.  A randomised prospective study comparing the new vacuum extractor policy with forceps delivery.

Authors:  R B Johanson; C Rice; M Doyle; J Arthur; L Anyanwu; J Ibrahim; A Warwick; C W Redman; P M O'Brien
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1993-06

10.  Outcome of forceps delivery versus vacuum extraction--a review of 200 cases.

Authors:  S Achanna; D Monga
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 1.858

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Instruments for assisted vaginal birth.

Authors:  Ganga L Verma; Jessica J Spalding; Marc D Wilkinson; G Justus Hofmeyr; Valerie Vannevel; Fidelma O'Mahony
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-24
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.