Literature DB >> 25056465

Comparison between two incision angles of mediolateral episiotomy in primiparous women: a randomized controlled trial.

Adel S S El-Din1, Magdy M Kamal, Malaka A Amin.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare two incision angles (60° vs 40°) of mediolateral episiotomy in primiparous Egyptian women, regarding the incidence of anal sphincter injury as well as episiotomy-related pain and dyspareunia.
METHODS: The current prospective randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01930721) was conducted at Ain Shams University Maternity Hospital. Eligible women were randomized into two groups: group 1 included women who had the episiotomy incision made at an angle of 60° to the midline; and group 2 included women who had the episiotomy incision made at an angle of 40° to the midline. Primary outcome measures were differences in short-term related pain and rate of third/fourth degree perineal tears.
RESULTS: A total of 330 primiparous women were recruited. The shortest distance to the outer edge of the anal epithelium was significantly shorter in women of group 2 when compared to that in women of group 1. Out of the included 330 women, 13 (4%) had third/fourth-degree perineal tears (4 [2.4%] in group 1 in contrast to nine [5.5%] in group 2). This difference was not significant A 60°-angled mediolateral episiotomy was associated with significantly higher rates of moderate/severe episiotomy-related pain post-partum. The rates of moderate/severe episiotomy-related pain and dyspareunia assessed 6 months post-partum were also higher among women of group 1, when compared to group 2; the latter two differences did not reach statistical significance, however.
CONCLUSION: When compared to the 40°-angled mediolateral episiotomies, 60°-angled ones were associated with significantly higher short-term-related pain. Although they were also associated with lower rate of third/fourth-degree perineal tears and higher rate of long-term related pain and dyspareunia, these differences did not reach a statistically significant level.
© 2014 The Authors. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research © 2014 Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dyspareunia; episiotomy; fourth-degree perineal tear; incision angle; obstetric anal sphincter injury; third-degree perineal tear

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25056465     DOI: 10.1111/jog.12432

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Res        ISSN: 1341-8076            Impact factor:   1.730


  4 in total

Review 1.  Obstetric anal sphincter injuries: review of anatomical factors and modifiable second stage interventions.

Authors:  Dharmesh S Kapoor; Ranee Thakar; Abdul H Sultan
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-06-05       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  The correct episiotomy: does it exist? A cross-sectional survey of four public Israeli hospitals and review of the literature.

Authors:  Lena Sagi-Dain; Shlomi Sagi
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 3.  Selective versus routine use of episiotomy for vaginal birth.

Authors:  Hong Jiang; Xu Qian; Guillermo Carroli; Paul Garner
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-02-08

4.  Randomized trial comparing episiotomies with Braun-Stadler episiotomy scissors and EPISCISSORS-60(®).

Authors:  Ganpat Sawant; Divya Kumar
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2015-06-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.