Kettle C, Hills R K, Ismail K M K
North Staffordshire Hospital NHS Trust, Maternity Hospital, Academic Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Newcastle Road, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, UK, ST4 6QG.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Oct 17(4):CD000947. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000947.pub2.
Millions of women worldwide undergo perineal suturing after childbirth and the type of repair may have an impact on pain and healing. For more than 70 years, researchers have been suggesting that continuous non-locking suture techniques for repair of the vagina, perineal muscles and skin are associated with less perineal pain than traditional interrupted methods.
To assess the effects of continuous versus interrupted absorbable sutures for repair of episiotomy and second degree perineal tears following childbirth.
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (June 2007).
Randomised trials comparing continuous versus interrupted sutures for repair of episiotomy and second-degree tears after vaginal delivery.
Three review authors independently assessed trial quality. Two of the three authors independently extracted data and a third author checked them. We contacted study authors for additional information.
Seven studies, involving 3822 women at point of entry, from four countries, have been included. The trials were heterogeneous in respect of operator skill and training. Meta-analysis showed that continuous suture techniques compared with interrupted sutures for perineal closure (all layers or perineal skin only) are associated with less pain for up to 10 days postpartum (relative risk (RR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.76). Subgroup analysis showed that there is a greater reduction in pain when continuous suturing techniques are used for all layers (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.71). There was an overall reduction in analgesia use associated with the continuous subcutaneous technique versus interrupted stitches for repair of perineal skin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.84). Subgroup analysis showed some evidence of reduction in dyspareunia experienced by participants in the groups that had continuous suturing for all layers (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.98). There was also a reduction in suture removal in the continuous suturing groups versus interrupted (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.65), but no significant differences were seen in the need for re-suturing of wounds or long-term pain.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The continuous suturing techniques for perineal closure, compared to interrupted methods, are associated with less short-term pain. Moreover, if the continuous technique is used for all layers (vagina, perineal muscles and skin) compared to perineal skin only, the reduction in pain is even greater.
全球数百万女性在分娩后接受会阴缝合,修复方式可能会对疼痛和愈合产生影响。70多年来,研究人员一直认为,用于修复阴道、会阴肌肉和皮肤的连续非锁定缝合技术比传统的间断缝合方法引起的会阴疼痛更少。
评估连续可吸收缝线与间断可吸收缝线在分娩后会阴切开术和二度会阴撕裂修复中的效果。
我们检索了Cochrane妊娠与分娩组试验注册库(2007年6月)。
比较连续缝线与间断缝线用于阴道分娩后会阴切开术和二度撕裂修复的随机试验。
三位综述作者独立评估试验质量。三位作者中的两位独立提取数据,第三位作者进行核对。我们联系研究作者以获取更多信息。
纳入了来自四个国家的7项研究,共3822名女性作为研究对象。这些试验在术者技能和培训方面存在异质性。荟萃分析表明,与间断缝合相比,连续缝合技术用于会阴闭合(所有层次或仅会阴皮肤)在产后10天内疼痛较轻(相对危险度(RR)0.70,95%置信区间0.64至0.76)。亚组分析表明,当连续缝合技术用于所有层次时疼痛减轻更明显(RR 0.65,95% CI 0.60至0.71)。与间断缝合相比,连续皮下缝合技术用于会阴皮肤修复时镇痛药物使用总体减少(RR 0.70,95% CI 0.58至0.84)。亚组分析显示,在所有层次采用连续缝合的组中,参与者性交困难有所减轻(RR 0.83,95% CI 0.70至0.98)。连续缝合组与间断缝合组相比,拆线情况也有所减少(RR 0.54,95% CI 0.45至0.65),但伤口再次缝合的需求或长期疼痛方面无显著差异。
与间断缝合方法相比,连续缝合技术用于会阴闭合时短期疼痛较轻。此外,与仅用于会阴皮肤相比,如果连续技术用于所有层次(阴道、会阴肌肉和皮肤),疼痛减轻更显著。