The impact of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries on the interpregnancy interval and pregnancy complications of subsequent delivery: A retrospective study.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics Pub Date : 2024-11-26 DOI:10.1002/ijgo.16045
Talia Birenstock, Lior Yahav, Adi Y Weintraub, Atar Ben Shmuel, Zehava Yohay, Tamar Eshkoli
{"title":"The impact of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries on the interpregnancy interval and pregnancy complications of subsequent delivery: A retrospective study.","authors":"Talia Birenstock, Lior Yahav, Adi Y Weintraub, Atar Ben Shmuel, Zehava Yohay, Tamar Eshkoli","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.16045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Our primary objective was to evaluate the interpregnancy interval (IPI) of women who have experienced obstetric anal sphincter injuries during delivery. Additionally, we compared adverse perinatal outcomes in subsequent deliveries following obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) in women with longer and shorter IPIs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study included women who had a subsequent pregnancy following OASIS and women without a history of such injuries, who delivered in a tertiary medical center between 2015 and 2019. Data were retrieved from patient computerized medical records. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the IPI defined as the time from delivery to the last menstruation prior to the subsequent delivery. Data analysis for our secondary objective was performed using mean and standard deviation for quantitative variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, 233 women experienced OASIS (0.27%), of whom 142 met the study criteria. There was no significant difference in the mean IPI between women in the two groups. However, women were significantly more likely to have a repeat perineal tear (49 [34.5%], P < 0.001), an episiotomy (16 [11.3%], P < 0.001), and an elective or an emergency cesarean section (60 [42.3%], P < 0.001) in their subsequent delivery. There was no difference in pregnancy outcomes among women who had a long compared with a short IPI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Women do not delay or avoid childbirth after experiencing OASIS. However, women are more likely to experience perineal tears, episiotomies, or a cesarean delivery in the subsequent pregnancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.16045","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Our primary objective was to evaluate the interpregnancy interval (IPI) of women who have experienced obstetric anal sphincter injuries during delivery. Additionally, we compared adverse perinatal outcomes in subsequent deliveries following obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) in women with longer and shorter IPIs.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study included women who had a subsequent pregnancy following OASIS and women without a history of such injuries, who delivered in a tertiary medical center between 2015 and 2019. Data were retrieved from patient computerized medical records. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the IPI defined as the time from delivery to the last menstruation prior to the subsequent delivery. Data analysis for our secondary objective was performed using mean and standard deviation for quantitative variables.

Results: During the study period, 233 women experienced OASIS (0.27%), of whom 142 met the study criteria. There was no significant difference in the mean IPI between women in the two groups. However, women were significantly more likely to have a repeat perineal tear (49 [34.5%], P < 0.001), an episiotomy (16 [11.3%], P < 0.001), and an elective or an emergency cesarean section (60 [42.3%], P < 0.001) in their subsequent delivery. There was no difference in pregnancy outcomes among women who had a long compared with a short IPI.

Conclusions: Women do not delay or avoid childbirth after experiencing OASIS. However, women are more likely to experience perineal tears, episiotomies, or a cesarean delivery in the subsequent pregnancy.

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
产科肛门括约肌损伤对妊娠间期和随后分娩的妊娠并发症的影响:回顾性研究。
目的我们的主要目的是评估在分娩过程中经历过产科肛门括约肌损伤的产妇的孕期间隔(IPI)。此外,我们还比较了IPI较长和较短的产妇在产科肛门括约肌损伤(OASIS)后再次分娩时的围产期不良结局:这项回顾性队列研究纳入了 2015 年至 2019 年期间在一家三级医疗中心分娩的肛门括约肌损伤(OASIS)后再次妊娠的妇女和无此类损伤史的妇女。数据取自患者的计算机化医疗记录。卡普兰-梅耶曲线和考克斯回归分析用于评估IPI,IPI定义为从分娩到再次分娩前最后一次月经的时间。我们使用定量变量的平均值和标准差对次要目标进行了数据分析:在研究期间,共有 233 名妇女(0.27%)经历了 OASIS,其中 142 人符合研究标准。两组妇女的平均 IPI 没有明显差异。然而,女性会阴部再次撕裂的可能性明显更高(49 [34.5%],P 结论:女性不会推迟或避免分娩:妇女在经历 OASIS 后不会推迟或避免分娩。但是,妇女在随后的妊娠中更有可能出现会阴撕裂、外阴切开术或剖宫产。
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
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
期刊最新文献
Prevention of maternal mortality with interventions in primary care services: What can we do? Risk factors for ectopic pregnancy occurrence: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstetrics and gynecology devices designed for low- and middle-income countries: A narrative review. The impact of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries on the interpregnancy interval and pregnancy complications of subsequent delivery: A retrospective study. HPV E6/E7 mRNA screening alone can be used as a screening method for cervical cancer in premenopausal women in China: A retrospective study.
×
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