Imaging Characteristics of Episiotomy Scars on Translabial Ultrasound: An Observational Study

Predictive factors for obstetric anal sphincter injury in primiparous women: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to perform a systematic review of predictive factors for obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) occurrence at first vaginal delivery, with the diagnosis made by ultrasound (US-OASI). The secondary objective was to report on incidence rates of sonographic anal sphincter (AS) trauma, including trauma that was not clinically reported at childbirth, among the studies providing data for our primary objective.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Both observational cohort studies and interventional trials were eligible for inclusion. Study eligibility was assessed independently by two authors. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to pool effect estimates from studies reporting on similar predictive factors. Summary odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) is reported with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool.

RESULTS

A total of 2805 records were screened and 21 met the inclusion criteria (16 prospective cohort studies, three retrospective cohort studies and two interventional non-randomized trials). Increasing gestational age at delivery (MD, 0.34 (95% CI, 0.04-0.64) weeks), shorter antepartum perineal body length (MD, -0.60 (95% CI, -1.09 to -0.11) cm), labor augmentation (OR, 1.81 (95% CI, 1.21-2.71)), instrumental delivery (OR, 2.13 (95% CI, 1.13-4.01)), in particular forceps extraction (OR, 3.56 (95% CI, 1.31-9.67)), shoulder dystocia (OR, 12.07 (95% CI, 1.06-137.60)), episiotomy use (OR, 1.85 (95% CI, 1.11-3.06)) and shorter episiotomy length (MD, -0.40 (95% CI, -0.75 to -0.05) cm) were associated with US-OASI. When pooling incidence rates, 26% (95% CI, 20-32%) of women who had a first vaginal delivery had US-OASI (20 studies; I2  = 88%). In studies reporting on both clinical and US-OASI rates, 20% (95% CI, 14-28%) of women had AS trauma on ultrasound that was not reported clinically at childbirth (16 studies; I2  = 90%). No differences were found in maternal age, body mass index, weight, subpubic arch angle, induction of labor, epidural analgesia, episiotomy angle, duration of first/second/active-second stages of labor, vacuum extraction, neonatal birth weight or head circumference between cases with and those without US-OASI. Antenatal perineal massage and use of an intrapartum pelvic floor muscle dilator did not affect the odds of US-OASI. Most (81%) studies were judged to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain and only four (19%) studies had an overall low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Given the ultrasound evidence of structural damage to the AS in 26% of women following a first vaginal delivery, clinicians should have a low threshold of suspicion for the condition. This systematic review identified several predictive factors for this. © 2023 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Assessing Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries: A Comparison of Exoanal and Endoanal Ultrasound

OBJECTIVES

To explore the differences in assessing obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASI) between transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) and endoanal ultrasound (EAUS) and test relationships between ultrasound findings and anal incontinence (AI) symptoms.

METHODS

A group of 196 women with a history of vaginal delivery was recruited. OASI was detected in a set of 5 slices by EAUS and 8 slices by TPUS. OASI grading was performed on TPUS rules and EAUS rules. A "significant sphincter defect" was diagnosed by TPUS and EAUS using "2/3 rules." Symptoms of AI were determined using the St Mark's Incontinence Score (SMIS). Ultrasound findings were compared between the two methods and correlated with symptoms.

RESULTS

Of 196 women, 29 (14.8%) suffered from AI with a mean SMIS of 12.1 ± 4.5, and 70 (35.7%) women with a mean age of 57 years had suspected OASI on imaging. Twenty-one (10.7%) "significant defects" were diagnosed by TPUS and 24 (12.2%) by EAUS. OASI Grades on TPUS had good agreement with EAUS rules (k = 0.70, P < .001). Logistic regression analysis showed that OASI Grade on imaging and "significant sphincter defects" seen on both forms of imaging were associated with AI symptoms. The odds ratio was 46 and 38 for "significant defects" on TPUS and EAUS, and 14 and 7 for OASI 3b+ on TPUS and EAUS in predicting AI, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

"Significant defects" diagnosed by EAUS or TPUS and OASI Grade 3b+ predict AI symptoms. The diagnostic performance of endoanal and exoanal ultrasound (EAUS and TPUS) appear to be very similar.

Diagnosis of maternal birth trauma by pelvic floor ultrasound

BRIEF SUMMARY

Maternal somatic birth trauma due to vaginal delivery is more common than generally assumed and an important cause of future morbidity. Maternal birth trauma may involve both psychological and somatic morbidity, some of it long-term and permanent. Somatic birth trauma is now understood to encompass not just episiotomy, perineal tears and obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASI), but also trauma to the levator ani muscle, termed 'avulsion'. This review will focus on recent developments in the imaging diagnosis of maternal birth trauma, discuss the most important risk factors and strategies for primary and secondary prevention. Translabial and exo-anal ultrasound allow the assessment of maternal birth trauma in routine clinical practice and enable the use of levator avulsion and anal sphincter trauma as key performance indicators of maternity services. This is likely to lead to a greater awareness of maternal birth trauma amongst maternity caregivers and improved outcomes for patients, not the least due to an increasing emphasis on patient autonomy and informed consent in antenatal and intrapartum care.

Assessment of Perineal Scars on Translabial Pelvic Floor Ultrasound: A Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to describe a method for identifying and evaluating perineal scars using translabial pelvic floor ultrasound. We hypothesized that translabial ultrasound can identify a perineal scar and can differentiate episiotomies from spontaneous tears.

METHODS

This pilot study is a secondary analysis of data obtained in the Epi-No® trial. Perineal integrity was assessed using volumes acquired on pelvic floor muscle contraction according to the method previously described for anal sphincter imaging. A scar was diagnosed if a hypoechoic distortion in the perineum was noted. We postulated that an episiotomy would result in a linear scar visible on four dimensional translabial ultrasound whereas nonlinear scars were considered the result of spontaneous perineal tear of grade 2 or higher. The results of this assessment were compared with data retrieved from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

A scar was identified in 79/120 women (66%): 42 (35%) linear and 37 (31%) nonlinear. Sonographic and clinical diagnosis agreed on the presence or absence of perineal trauma in 66%. Agreement for the type of laceration was 50%.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective pilot study, a blinded assessment of translabial ultrasound volume data showed agreement between clinical data and sonographic assessment of perineal integrity in 66% and of type of laceration in 50%. More work is needed to optimize the method in assessment of perineal scars to improve its performance before it can be used in clinical audit and research.

Obstetric risk factors for anal sphincter trauma in a urogynecological population

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Obstetric anal sphincter tears are the single major modifiable risk factor for anal incontinence (AI) in women. We undertook a retrospective observational study in a tertiary urogynecology unit to describe the prevalence of sonographic anal sphincter defects in a urogynecological population and investigate obstetric risk factors.

METHODS

Files of women seen for investigation of pelvic floor disorders between January 2014 and May 2021 were reviewed. Sonographic defects of the external anal sphincter were analyzed using stored 4D ultrasound imaging data. Explanatory parameters were number of vaginal births, delivery mode, age at first vaginal birth, and birthweight of the first vaginally born baby.

RESULTS

Of 3,037 women seen during the inclusion period, data were missing in 219, leaving 2,818. AI was reported by 508 (18%), with a mean St Marks score of 11 (1-23) and a mean bother score of 5.9 (0-10). External sphincter defects were detected in 945 women (34%), with a "residual defect" in 343 (12%). The strongest risk factors for a residual defect were first vaginal birth and forceps, with higher-order multiparity adding risk. On multivariate analysis, forceps and vaginal parity >5 remained significant predictors, as opposed to age at first birth and birthweight of the firstborn.

CONCLUSIONS

In this observational study in urogynecological patients, 12% showed a residual EAS defect on imaging. The most obvious risk factors for the diagnosis of a residual defect on exo-anal imaging were the first vaginal birth and forceps, with higher-order vaginal parity conveying additional risk.

Episiotomy in vacuum extraction, do we cut the levator ani muscle? A prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Vaginal delivery may lead to levator ani muscle (LAM) injury or avulsion. Episiotomy may reduce obstetric anal sphincter injury in operative vaginal delivery, but may increase the risk of LAM injury. Our aim was to assess whether lateral episiotomy in vacuum extraction (VE) in primiparous women causes LAM injury.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of 58 primiparous women with episiotomy nested within an ongoing multicenter randomized controlled trial of lateral episiotomy versus no episiotomy in VE (EVA trial) was carried out in Sweden. LAM injury was evaluated using 3D endovaginal ultrasound 6-12 months after delivery and Levator Ani Deficiency (LAD) score. Episiotomy scar properties were measured. Characteristics were described and compared using Chi-squared tests. We stipulated that if a lateral episiotomy cuts the LAM, ≥50% would have a LAM injury. Among those, ≥50% would be side specific. We compared the observed prevalence with a test of one proportion.

RESULTS

Twelve (20.7%, 95% CI 10.9-32.9) of 58 women had a LAD (p < 0.001, compared with the stipulated 50%). Six (50.0%, 95% CI 21.1% to 78.9%) of 12 women had a LAD on the episiotomy side, including those with bilateral LAD (p = 1.00). Two (16.7%, 95% CI 2.1% to 48.4%) of 12 women had a LAD exclusively on the episiotomy side (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no excessive risk of cutting the LAM while performing a lateral episiotomy. LAD was not seen in women with episiotomies shorter than 18 mm.