Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2021 Mar;34(6):993-1001. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2019.1619686. Epub 2019 Jun 3.
Perineal trauma at the time of vaginal delivery is common, and when the anal sphincter is included, these injuries can be associated with additional morbidity including incontinence, pelvic pain, and sexual dysfunction.
The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to evaluate whether a hands-on technique during vaginal delivery results in less incidence of perineal trauma than a hands-off technique.
Electronic databases were searched from their inception until June 2018. No restrictions for language or geographic location were applied. The reference lists of identified articles were examined to identify studies not captured by electronic searches. Randomized controlled trials comparing a hands-on technique of perineal support during vaginal delivery (i.e. intervention group) with a hands-off technique (i.e. control group) were included in the meta-analysis. Hands-on was defined as involving one hand on the fetal head, applying pressure to control expulsion, with the other hand applying pressure on the maternal perineum. The primary outcome was severe perineal trauma, defined as either third- or fourth-degree lacerations. The meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model of DerSimonian and Laird, to produce summary treatment effects in terms of relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
Five trials, including 7287 women, were analyzed. All studies included singleton gestations with cephalic presentation at term undergoing spontaneous vaginal delivery. Women randomized to the hands-on technique had similar incidence of severe perineal trauma (1.5 versus 1.3%; RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.56-7.15). There was no significant between-group difference in the incidence of intact perineum, first-, second- and fourth-degree laceration. Hands-on technique was associated with increased risk of third-degree lacerations (2.6 versus 0.7%; RR 3.41, 95% CI 1.39-8.37) and of episiotomy (13.6 versus 9.8%, RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.14-2.22) compared to the hands-off technique.
Hands-on technique during spontaneous vaginal delivery of singleton gestations results in similar incidence of several perineal traumas compared to a hands-off technique. The incidence of third-degree lacerations and of episiotomy increases with the hands-on technique. Key Message A hands-on technique during vaginal delivery results in similar incidence of severe lacerations compared to hands-off.
阴道分娩时会阴创伤很常见,如果肛门括约肌也受到损伤,那么这些损伤可能会导致更多的并发症,包括失禁、盆腔疼痛和性功能障碍。
本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是评估阴道分娩时会阴支持的手法是否比不干预的手法导致更少的会阴创伤。
从数据库建立开始至 2018 年 6 月,检索电子数据库。未对语言或地理位置进行限制。还检查了已确定文章的参考文献列表,以确定未通过电子搜索捕获的研究。将比较阴道分娩时会阴支持的手法(即干预组)与不干预的手法(即对照组)的随机对照试验纳入荟萃分析。会阴支持的手法定义为一只手放在胎儿头部上,施加压力以控制分娩,另一只手施加压力于产妇的会阴。主要结局是严重的会阴创伤,定义为三度或四度撕裂。使用 DerSimonian 和 Laird 的随机效应模型进行荟萃分析,以产生相对风险(RR)和 95%置信区间(CI)的汇总治疗效果。
纳入了 5 项试验,共 7287 名女性。所有研究均包括足月单胎妊娠、头位、自然阴道分娩的女性。随机分配至会阴支持手法组的女性严重会阴创伤的发生率相似(1.5%与 1.3%;RR 2.00,95%CI 0.56-7.15)。两组之间会阴完整、一度、二度和四度撕裂的发生率没有显著差异。会阴支持手法与三度撕裂(2.6%与 0.7%;RR 3.41,95%CI 1.39-8.37)和会阴切开术(13.6%与 9.8%;RR 1.59,95%CI 1.14-2.22)的发生率增加相关。
与不干预的手法相比,在单胎妊娠的自然阴道分娩中使用会阴支持手法导致的几种会阴创伤发生率相似。会阴支持手法会增加三度撕裂和会阴切开术的发生率。
与不干预的手法相比,阴道分娩时使用会阴支持手法导致的严重撕裂发生率相似。