Lateral episiotomy or no episiotomy in vacuum assisted delivery in nulliparous women (EVA): multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial

Author:

Bergendahl SandraORCID,Jonsson MariaORCID,Hesselman SusanneORCID,Ankarcrona VictoriaORCID,Leijonhufvud Åsa,Wihlbäck Anna-CarinORCID,Wallström ToveORCID,Rydström Emmie,Friberg Hanna,Kopp Kallner HelenaORCID,Brismar Wendel SophiaORCID

Abstract

Abstract Objective To assess the effect of lateral episiotomy, compared with no episiotomy, on obstetric anal sphincter injury in nulliparous women requiring vacuum extraction. Design A multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. Setting Eight hospitals in Sweden, 2017-23. Participants 717 nulliparous women with a single live fetus of 34 gestational weeks or more, requiring vacuum extraction were randomly assigned (1:1) to lateral episiotomy or no episiotomy using sealed opaque envelopes. Randomisation was stratified by study site. Intervention A standardised lateral episiotomy was performed during the vacuum extraction, at crowning of the fetal head, starting 1-3 cm from the posterior fourchette, at a 60° (45-80°) angle from the midline, and 4 cm (3-5 cm) long. The comparison was no episiotomy unless considered indispensable. Main outcome measures The primary outcome of the episiotomy in vacuum assisted delivery (EVA) trial was obstetric anal sphincter injury, clinically diagnosed by combined visual inspection and digital rectal and vaginal examination. The primary analysis used a modified intention-to-treat population that included all consenting women with attempted or successful vacuum extraction. As a result of an interim analysis at significance level P<0.01, the primary endpoint was tested at 4% significance level with accompanying 96% confidence interval (CI). Results From 1 July 2017 to 15 February 2023, 717 women were randomly assigned: 354 (49%) to lateral episiotomy and 363 (51%) to no episiotomy. Before vacuum extraction attempt, one woman withdrew consent and 14 had a spontaneous birth, leaving 702 for the primary analysis. In the intervention group, 21 (6%) of 344 women sustained obstetric anal sphincter injury, compared with 47 (13%) of 358 women in the comparison group (P=0.002). The risk difference was −7.0% (96% CI −11.7% to −2.5%). The risk ratio adjusted for site was 0.47 (96% CI 0.23 to 0.97) and unadjusted risk ratio was 0.46 (0.28 to 0.78). No significant differences were noted between groups in postpartum pain, blood loss, neonatal outcomes, or total adverse events, but the intervention group had more wound infections and dehiscence. Conclusions Lateral episiotomy can be recommended for nulliparous women requiring vacuum extraction to significantly reduce the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02643108 .

Funder

Vetenskapsrådet

Publisher

BMJ

Reference39 articles.

1. A systematic review of etiological factors for postpartum fecal incontinence

2. Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services. SBU Systematic Review Summaries. Anal sphincter injuries: a systematic review and assessment of medical, social and ethical aspects. Stockholm: Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment (SBU). 2016.

3. Risk factors for severe perineal trauma during childbirth: An updated meta-analysis

4. Variations in rates of severe perineal tears and episiotomies in 20 European countries: a study based on routine national data in Euro-Peristat Project

5. Risk Factors for the Development of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries in Modern Obstetric Practice

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3