Zhou Fan, Wang Xiao Dong, Li Jing, Huang Gui Qiong, Gao Bing Xin
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Renmin Nan Road, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610041.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Feb 5;2014(2):CD010441. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010441.pub2.
Perineal hyaluronidase (HAase) injection was widely used to reduce the occurrence of perineal trauma, pain and need for episiotomy in the 1950s to 1960s. Reports suggested that the administration of HAase was a simple, low risk, low cost and effective way to decrease perineal trauma without adverse effects.
The objective of this review was to assess the effectiveness and safety of perineal HAase injection for reducing spontaneous perineal trauma, episiotomy and perineal pain in vaginal deliveries.
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2013), the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (both on 1 April 2013), and reference lists of retrieved studies. We also contacted relevant organisations.
Published and unpublished randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing perineal HAase injection with placebo injection or no intervention in vaginal deliveries.
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. Data were checked for accuracy.
The search strategy identified six potentially eligible studies. Two studies were excluded. We included four randomised controlled trials that randomised a total of 599 women (data were available for 595 women).Two trials (283 women) compared the effects of perineal HAase injection during the second stage of labour with placebo injection and were at low risk of bias. Three trials (one three-armed trial was analysed twice) (373 women) compared the effects of perineal HAase injection during second stage of labour with no intervention and two out of the three trials were at high risk of bias. Data from four trials involving 599 women suggested that perineal HAase injection during second stage of labour had a lower incidence of perineal trauma (average risk ratio (RR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 0.95,Tau² = 0.08, I² = 82% compared with women in the control group, but there was no clear evidence of a reduction in the incidence of episiotomy (average RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.29, Tau² = 0.17, I² = 66%), first and second degree perineal lacerations (average RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.33, Tau² = 0.30 , I² = 85%) and third and fourth degree perineal lacerations (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.13). Data from two trials involving 283 women indicated that there was no clear evidence of a reduction in the incidence of perineal trauma (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.06, Tau²=1.07, I² = 7%), episiotomy (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.89, Tau² = 0.27, I² = 54%), first and second degree perineal lacerations (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.40, Tau² = 1.11, I² = 10%) and third and fourth degree perineal lacerations (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.13) with perineal HAase injection. Data from three trials involving 373 women suggested that perineal HAase injection during second stage of labour had a lower incidence of perineal trauma (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.88, Tau² = 0.08, I² = 78%) compared with no intervention, but had no clear effect on in the incidence of episiotomy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.42, Tau² = 0.16, I² = 70%) and first and second degree perineal lacerations (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.10, Tau² = 0.18, I² = 59%). No side effects were reported in the included trials.No included trials reported on perineal pain and other pre-specified secondary outcomes: perineal trauma requiring suturing; blood loss; dyspareunia; urinary incontinence; faecal incontinence; assisted delivery rate; women's satisfaction; Apgar score less than seven at five minutes and need for admission to special care baby unit.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Perineal HAase injection during second stage of labour had a lower incidence of perineal trauma compared with control or no intervention, but there was no clear evidence of benefit compared with placebo injection. The difference in incidence of perineal trauma may probably be due to bias and confounding in the non-placebo controlled comparison, this result should be interpreted cautiously. The potential use of perineal HAase injection as a method to reduce perineal trauma were yet to be determined as there was no appropriate established dose for HAase, no evidence of follow up, and the number of high-quality trials and outcomes reported were too limited to draw conclusions on its effectiveness and safety. Further rigorous randomised controlled trials are required to evaluate the role of perineal HAase injection in vaginal deliveries.
20世纪50年代至60年代,会阴透明质酸酶(HAase)注射被广泛用于减少会阴创伤、疼痛的发生以及会阴切开术的需求。报告表明,注射HAase是一种简单、低风险、低成本且有效的减少会阴创伤的方法,且无不良反应。
本综述的目的是评估会阴注射HAase在减少阴道分娩时自发性会阴创伤、会阴切开术和会阴疼痛方面的有效性和安全性。
我们检索了Cochrane妊娠与分娩组试验注册库(2013年10月31日)、国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)和学位论文网络数字图书馆(均为2013年4月1日),以及检索到的研究的参考文献列表。我们还联系了相关组织。
比较阴道分娩时会阴注射HAase与安慰剂注射或不干预的已发表和未发表的随机及半随机对照试验。
两位综述作者独立评估试验是否纳入、提取数据并评估方法学质量。检查数据的准确性。
检索策略确定了6项潜在符合条件的研究。排除了2项研究。我们纳入了4项随机对照试验,共随机分配了599名女性(595名女性的数据可用)。两项试验(283名女性)比较了第二产程会阴注射HAase与安慰剂注射的效果,且偏倚风险较低。三项试验(一项三臂试验分析了两次)(373名女性)比较了第二产程会阴注射HAase与不干预的效果,三项试验中有两项偏倚风险较高。涉及599名女性的四项试验数据表明,与对照组女性相比,第二产程会阴注射HAase会阴创伤发生率较低(平均风险比(RR)0.69,95%置信区间(CI)0.50至0.95,Tau² = 0.08,I² = 82%),但没有明确证据表明会阴切开术发生率降低(平均RR 0.74,95% CI 0.43至1.29,Tau² = 0.17,I² = 66%),一、二度会阴裂伤(平均RR 0.54,95% CI 0.38至1.33,Tau² = 0.30,I² = 85%)以及三、四度会阴裂伤(RR 0.12,95% CI 0.01至2.13)发生率降低。涉及283名女性的两项试验数据表明,没有明确证据表明会阴注射HAase会降低会阴创伤发生率(RR 0.90,95% CI 0.77至1.06,Tau² = 1.07,I² = 7%)、会阴切开术发生率(RR 0.77,95% CI 0.32至1.89,Tau² = 0.27,I² = 54%)、一、二度会阴裂伤发生率(RR 1.08,95% CI 0.