Episiotomy Technique and Management of Anal Sphincter Tears-A Survey of Clinical Practice and Education

Variation in Episiotomy Use Among Nulliparous Individuals by Maternity Care Provider and Associated Rates of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury

OBJECTIVES

To quantify variation in the association between episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) by maternity care provider in spontaneous and operative vaginal deliveries (SVDs and OVDs).

METHODS

Population-based retrospective cohort study of vaginal, term deliveries among nullipara in Canada (2004-2015). Adjusted rate ratios (ARRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using log-binomial regression to quantify the associations between episiotomy and OASI, stratified by care provider (obstetrician [OB], family physician [FP], or registered midwife [RM]) while adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

The study included 631 642 deliveries. Episiotomy use varied by provider: among SVDs, the episiotomy rate was 19.6%, 14.4%, and 8.4% in the OB, FP, and RM groups, respectively. The rate of OASI was higher among SVDs with versus without episiotomy (5.8% vs 4.6%). Conversely, OASI occurred less frequently in operative vaginal deliveries with episiotomy (15.3%) compared with those without (16.7%). In all provider groups, the ARR for OASI was increased with episiotomy in SVD and decreased with episiotomy with forceps delivery. No differences in these associations were observed by provider except among vacuum delivery (ARR with episiotomy vs. without, OB: 0.88, 95% CI 0.84-0.92; FP: 0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.96, RM: 1.22, 95% CI 1.02-1.48).

CONCLUSIONS

In nullipara, irrespective of maternity care provider, there is a positive association between episiotomy and OASI among SVDs and an inverse association between episiotomy and deliveries with forceps. The relationship between episiotomy and OASI is modified by maternity care providers among vacuum deliveries.

Is there still an indication for episiotomy? Results from a French national database analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the link between mediolateral episiotomy and the occurrence of obstetrical anal sphincter injury (OASIS).

METHODS

Data were collected from the national database (PMSI; Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information). Women between 18 and 50 years old, undergoing a vaginal delivery in France in 2018 were included. The main outcome was factors associated with a higher adjusted OASIS rate after a vaginal delivery.

RESULTS

Of 623 003 women with a vaginal delivery, 239 949 were primiparous (38.5%), 62 310 experienced mediolateral episiotomy (10.0%) and 7077 had a third- or fourth-degree perineal tear (1.14%). Risk factors for OASIS were primiparity (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.97), shoulder dystocia (aOR 2.57), instrumental delivery (aOR 2.81), gestational diabetes (aOR 1.20), and post-term delivery (aOR 1.53). Mediolateral episiotomy increased the occurrence of OASIS for women without an instrumental delivery, either for parous (OR 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.62) or primiparous (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.13-1.39) women. In contrast, episiotomy among primiparous women with episiotomy and a vacuum or forceps delivery significantly decreased the risk for OASIS (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.56-0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

The practice of routine episiotomy should be discouraged. Selective mediolateral episiotomy should be considered with extreme caution and mainly for primiparous women during instrumental vaginal delivery. Further randomized trial may confirm such results.

Attitudes and knowledge regarding episiotomy use and technique in vacuum extraction: A web-based survey among doctors in Sweden

OBJECTIVES

Correct episiotomy use and technique may prevent obstetric anal sphincter injuries. We aimed to explore the attitudes, use, and technique regarding episiotomy among doctors in Sweden, and their willingness to contribute to a randomized controlled trial of lateral episiotomy or no episiotomy in vacuum extraction in nulliparous women.

STUDY DESIGN

A web-based survey was sent to members of the Swedish Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (n = 2140). The survey included 31 questions addressing personal characteristics, use of episiotomy, a two-dimensional picture on which the respondents drew an episiotomy, and questions regarding attitudes towards episiotomy and participation in a randomized controlled trial. We calculated the proportion of supposedly protective episiotomies (fulfilling criteria of a lateral or mediolateral episiotomy and a length ≥ 30 mm). We compared the results between obstetricians, gynecologists, and residents using Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests for differences between groups, and logistic regression to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of drawing a protective episiotomy.

RESULTS

We received 432 responses. Doctors without a vacuum delivery in the past year were excluded, leaving 384 respondents for further analyses. In all, 222 (57.8%) doctors reported use of episiotomy in<50% of vacuum extractions. We obtained 308 illustrated episiotomies with a median angle of 53°, incision point distance from the midline of 21 mm, and length of 36 mm, corresponding to a lateral episiotomy. Few doctors combined these parameters correctly resulting in 167 (54.2%) incorrectly drawn episiotomies. Residents drew shorter episiotomies than obstetricians and gynecologists. Doctors ranked episiotomy the least important intervention to prevent obstetric anal sphincter injuries in vacuum extraction. Doctors contributing to an ongoing randomized controlled trial of lateral episiotomy or no episiotomy in vacuum extraction were more able to draw a protective episiotomy (OR 3.69, 95% confidence interval 1.94-7.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Doctors in Sweden reported restrictive use of episiotomy in vacuum extraction and depicted lateral type episiotomies, although the majority were incorrectly drawn. Preventive episiotomy was ranked of low importance. Our results imply a need for education, training, and guidelines to increase uptake of correct episiotomy technique, which could result in improved prevention of obstetric anal sphincter injuries.

Midline and Mediolateral Episiotomy: Risk Assessment Based on Clinical Anatomy

Episiotomy is the surgical incision of the vaginal orifice and perineum to ease the passage of an infant’s head while crowning during vaginal delivery. Although episiotomy remains one of the most frequently performed surgeries around the world, short- and long-term complications from the procedure are not uncommon. We performed midline and mediolateral episiotomies with the aim of correlating commonly diagnosed postepisiotomy complications with risk of injury to perineal neuromuscular and erectile structures. We performed 61 incisions on 47 female cadavers and dissected around the incision site. Dissections revealed that midline incisions did not bisect any major neuromuscular structures, although they did increase the risk of direct and indirect injury to the subcutaneous portion of the external anal sphincter. Mediolateral incisions posed greater risk of iatrogenic injury to ipsilateral nerve, muscle, erectile, and gland tissues. Clinician discretion is advised when weighing the potential risks to maternal perineal anatomy during vaginal delivery when episiotomy is indicated. If episiotomy is warranted, an understanding of perineal anatomy may benefit diagnosis of postsurgical complications.

Episiotomy use among vaginal deliveries and the association with anal sphincter injury: a population-based retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The rate of obstetric anal sphincter injury has increased in recent years, particularly among operative vaginal deliveries. We sought to characterize temporal trends in episiotomy use and to quantify the association between episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injury.

METHODS

Using a population-based retrospective cohort study design of hospital data from 2004 to 2017, we studied all vaginal deliveries of singleton infants at term gestation in Canada (excluding Quebec). Rates of obstetric anal sphincter injury were contrasted between women who had an episiotomy and those who did not. Log-binomial regression was used to estimate the association between episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injury among women with spontaneous and operative vaginal deliveries after controlling for confounders.

RESULTS

The study population included 2 570 847 deliveries. Episiotomy use declined significantly among operative vaginal deliveries (53.1% in 2004 to 43.2% in 2017, p < 0.0001) and spontaneous vaginal deliveries (13.5% in 2004 to 6.5% in 2017, p < 0.0001). Episiotomy was associated with higher rates of obstetric anal sphincter injury among spontaneous vaginal deliveries (4.8 with episiotomy v. 2.4% without; adjusted rate ratio [RR] 2.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.00-2.11) and this association remained after stratification by parity and obstetric history. In contrast, episiotomy was associated with lower rates of obstetric anal sphincter injury among forceps deliveries in nulliparous women (adjusted RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.61-0.66), and women with vaginal birth after cesarean (adjusted RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.60-0.85), but not among parous women without a previous cesarean (adjusted RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.00-1.34).

INTERPRETATION

Episiotomy use has declined in Canada for all vaginal deliveries. The protective association between episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injury among women who gave birth by operative vaginal delivery (especially forceps) warrants reconsideration of clinical practice among nulliparous women and those attempting vaginal birth after cesarean.