Talia Friedman1,2, Guy D Eslick3,4, Hans Peter Dietz5. 1. Sydney Medical School Nepean, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 2. Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. 3. The Whiteley-Martin Research Centre, Discipline of Surgery, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 4. Nepean Hospital, The University of Sydney, Clinical Sciences Building, P. O. Box 67, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia. 5. Sydney Medical School Nepean, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. hans.dietz@sydney.edu.au.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Female pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common condition, with a lifetime risk for surgery of 10-20%. Pregnancy and childbirth are the commonest modifiable risk factors for POP, and avulsion of the levator ani muscle is likely to be an etiological factor. Avulsion is more common in instrumental delivery. However, we were unable to identify a meta-analysis on this issue. Our aim was to perform a systemic review and quantitative meta-analysis of the prevalence of avulsion relative to delivery mode. METHODS: Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published between 1991 and 1 October 2018 without language restrictions. RESULTS: Twenty studies met inclusion criteria, and 14 were prospective. Seventeen used sonographic techniques; three were magnetic resonance (MR) studies. For this review, three comparisons were performed: forceps vs. vacuum (9 studies), forceps vs. normal vaginal delivery (NVD) (12 studies), and vacuum vs. NVD (12 studies). The first meta-analysis showed an increased risk for avulsion following forceps compared with vacuum, with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.57 and confidence interval (CI) 3.21-6.51, p < 0.001. The second showed an increased risk for avulsion following forceps compared with NVD, with an OR of 6.94 (4.93-9.78), p < 0.001. The third showed no significant increased risk for avulsion following vacuum compared with NVD, with an OR of 1.31 (1.00-1.72), p = 0.051. CONCLUSIONS: Forceps is a strong risk factor for avulsion, with an OR of 6.94 (4.93-9.78) compared with NVD and an OR of 4.57 (3.21-6.51) compared with vacuum birth.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Female pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common condition, with a lifetime risk for surgery of 10-20%. Pregnancy and childbirth are the commonest modifiable risk factors for POP, and avulsion of the levator ani muscle is likely to be an etiological factor. Avulsion is more common in instrumental delivery. However, we were unable to identify a meta-analysis on this issue. Our aim was to perform a systemic review and quantitative meta-analysis of the prevalence of avulsion relative to delivery mode. METHODS: Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published between 1991 and 1 October 2018 without language restrictions. RESULTS: Twenty studies met inclusion criteria, and 14 were prospective. Seventeen used sonographic techniques; three were magnetic resonance (MR) studies. For this review, three comparisons were performed: forceps vs. vacuum (9 studies), forceps vs. normal vaginal delivery (NVD) (12 studies), and vacuum vs. NVD (12 studies). The first meta-analysis showed an increased risk for avulsion following forceps compared with vacuum, with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.57 and confidence interval (CI) 3.21-6.51, p < 0.001. The second showed an increased risk for avulsion following forceps compared with NVD, with an OR of 6.94 (4.93-9.78), p < 0.001. The third showed no significant increased risk for avulsion following vacuum compared with NVD, with an OR of 1.31 (1.00-1.72), p = 0.051. CONCLUSIONS: Forceps is a strong risk factor for avulsion, with an OR of 6.94 (4.93-9.78) compared with NVD and an OR of 4.57 (3.21-6.51) compared with vacuum birth.
Entities:
Keywords:
Forceps; Levator avulsion; Meta-analysis; Pelvic organ prolapse; Risk factors
Authors: Dan V Valsky; Sarah M Cohen; Michal Lipschuetz; Drorith Hochner-Celnikier; Hagit Daum; Itai Yagel; Simcha Yagel Journal: J Ultrasound Med Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Adil E Bharucha; Charles H Knowles; Isabelle Mack; Allison Malcolm; Nicholas Oblizajek; Satish Rao; S Mark Scott; Andrea Shin; Paul Enck Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2022-08-10 Impact factor: 65.038
Authors: Jan A Deprest; Rufus Cartwright; Hans Peter Dietz; Luiz Gustavo Oliveira Brito; Marianne Koch; Kristina Allen-Brady; Jittima Manonai; Adi Y Weintraub; John W F Chua; Romana Cuffolo; Felice Sorrentino; Laura Cattani; Judith Decoene; Anne-Sophie Page; Natalie Weeg; Glaucia M Varella Pereira; Marina Gabriela M C Mori da Cunha de Carvalho; Katerina Mackova; Lucie Hajkova Hympanova; Pamela Moalli; Oksana Shynlova; Marianna Alperin; Maria Augusta T Bortolini Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2022-03-10 Impact factor: 1.932