The impact of selective episiotomy on maternal short-term morbidity: a retrospective study.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-25 DOI:10.1080/01443615.2024.2369664
Gazal Radner, Lukas Jennewein, Dörthe Brüggmann, Frank Louwen, Ammar Al Naimi
{"title":"The impact of selective episiotomy on maternal short-term morbidity: a retrospective study.","authors":"Gazal Radner, Lukas Jennewein, Dörthe Brüggmann, Frank Louwen, Ammar Al Naimi","doi":"10.1080/01443615.2024.2369664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim is to investigate the risk of short-term maternal morbidity caused by the selective clinical use of episiotomy (rate < 0.02), and to compare the risk of severe perineal tears with the statewide risk.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the effect of selective episiotomy on the risk of severe perineal tears and blood loss in singleton term deliveries, using propensity scores with inverse probability weighting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 10992 women who delivered vaginally between 2008-2018. Episiotomy was performed in 171 patients (1.55%), three of whom (1.75%) experienced severe perineal tears compared to 156 (1.44%) in the control cohort. The adjusted odds ratio of severe perineal tears was 2.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51, 8.19 with 0.3 <i>p</i> value). Multivariate linear regression showed that episiotomy increased blood loss by 96.3 ml (95% CI: 6.4, 186.2 with 0.03 <i>p</i> value). Episiotomy was performed in 23% (95% CI: 0.228, 0.23) of vaginal deliveries in the state of Hessen, with a risk of severe perineal tears of 0.0143 (95% CI: 0.0139, 0.0147) compared to 0.0145 (95% CI: 0.0123, 0.0168) in our entire cohort.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Selective use of episiotomy does not increase the risk of higher-grade perineal tears. However, it may be associated with maternal morbidity in terms of increased blood loss.</p>","PeriodicalId":16627,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","volume":"44 1","pages":"2369664"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01443615.2024.2369664","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim is to investigate the risk of short-term maternal morbidity caused by the selective clinical use of episiotomy (rate < 0.02), and to compare the risk of severe perineal tears with the statewide risk.

Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the effect of selective episiotomy on the risk of severe perineal tears and blood loss in singleton term deliveries, using propensity scores with inverse probability weighting.

Results: This study included 10992 women who delivered vaginally between 2008-2018. Episiotomy was performed in 171 patients (1.55%), three of whom (1.75%) experienced severe perineal tears compared to 156 (1.44%) in the control cohort. The adjusted odds ratio of severe perineal tears was 2.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51, 8.19 with 0.3 p value). Multivariate linear regression showed that episiotomy increased blood loss by 96.3 ml (95% CI: 6.4, 186.2 with 0.03 p value). Episiotomy was performed in 23% (95% CI: 0.228, 0.23) of vaginal deliveries in the state of Hessen, with a risk of severe perineal tears of 0.0143 (95% CI: 0.0139, 0.0147) compared to 0.0145 (95% CI: 0.0123, 0.0168) in our entire cohort.

Conclusions: Selective use of episiotomy does not increase the risk of higher-grade perineal tears. However, it may be associated with maternal morbidity in terms of increased blood loss.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
选择性外阴切开术对产妇短期发病率的影响:一项回顾性研究。
背景:目的:调查临床上选择性使用外阴切开术(比率<0.02)导致产妇短期发病的风险,并将严重会阴撕裂的风险与全州范围内的风险进行比较:在这项回顾性队列研究中,我们采用反概率加权倾向评分法,调查了选择性外阴切开术对单胎足月分娩中严重会阴撕裂和失血风险的影响:这项研究纳入了2008-2018年间经阴道分娩的10992名产妇。171名患者(1.55%)进行了外阴切开术,其中3名患者(1.75%)出现了严重会阴撕裂,而对照组中有156名患者(1.44%)出现了严重会阴撕裂。会阴严重撕裂的调整后几率比为 2.06(95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.51, 8.19,P 值为 0.3)。多变量线性回归显示,外阴切开术使失血量增加了 96.3 毫升(95% 置信区间:6.4 至 186.2,P 值为 0.03)。在黑森州,23%(95% CI:0.228,0.23)的阴道分娩采用了外阴切开术,会阴严重撕裂的风险为 0.0143(95% CI:0.0139,0.0147),而在我们的整个队列中,外阴切开术的风险为 0.0145(95% CI:0.0123,0.0168):结论:选择性使用会阴切开术不会增加会阴撕裂的风险。结论:选择性使用会阴切开术不会增加更高级别的会阴撕裂的风险,但可能与产妇的发病率有关,即失血量增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.70%
发文量
398
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology represents an established forum for the entire field of obstetrics and gynaecology, publishing a broad range of original, peer-reviewed papers, from scientific and clinical research to reviews relevant to practice. It also includes occasional supplements on clinical symposia. The journal is read widely by trainees in our specialty and we acknowledge a major role in education in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Past and present editors have recognized the difficulties that junior doctors encounter in achieving their first publications and spend time advising authors during their initial attempts at submission. The journal continues to attract a world-wide readership thanks to the emphasis on practical applicability and its excellent record of drawing on an international base of authors.
期刊最新文献
The relationship between pre-pregnancy BMI and energy and macronutrients intakes during pregnancy in women from Yucatan, Mexico. How I maximised my training during the COVID-19 pandemic. Successful management of pyoderma gangrenosum after caesarean section: a case report. Prenatal MRI for the diagnosis of foetal pial arteriovenous fistula: a case report and literature review. Abnormal preoperative haematological parameters in Endometrial cancer; reflecting tumour aggressiveness or reduced response to radiotherapy?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1