Gachon Bertrand, Durocher Lisa, Garabedian Charles, Guerby Paul, Chauleur Celine, Bertholdt Charline, Desplanches Thomas, Sentilhes Loïc, Sibiude Jeanne, Mottet Nicolas, Le Ray Camille, Estzo Marie Laure, Lassel Linda, Bel Sandra, Devouge Pauline, Dochez Vincent, Riethmuller Didier, Schmitz Thomas, Vincent-Rohfritsch Aurelie, Harvey Thierry, Delaunay Florian, Ducarme Guillaume, Checchi-Guichard Catherine, Foucher Yohann, de Tayrac Renaud, Pizzoferrato Anne Cécile, Pierre Fabrice, Berveiller Paul, Fritel Xavier
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers, France; Clinique Bouchard, Marseille, France.
INSERM CIC 1402, Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers University, Poitiers, France.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2025 Aug;233(2):123.e1-123.e24. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2025.01.029. Epub 2025 Jan 30.
We are lacking data with a high level of evidence on the use of episiotomy during instrumental delivery to prevent anal sphincter injury, which nonetheless presents the highest risk.
Our main objective was to assess the protective effect of episiotomy against obstetric anal sphincter injury in nulliparous women during instrumental delivery according to type of instrument. We also investigated its impact on immediate maternal and neonatal morbidity.
We conducted a prospective comparative cohort study for clinical trial emulation by means of propensity score weighting. The study was especially designed for consideration of possible confounders. This was a nationwide observational multicenter study including 111 French public and private maternity units between April 2021 and March 2022. We included nulliparous women, with singleton cephalic fetus, at more than 34 weeks of gestation. We considered vacuum, forceps, and spatula deliveries. We proceeded to a comparative analysis between women with and without episiotomy. The main outcome was obstetric anal sphincter injury occurrence. We used composite criteria for both maternal and neonatal immediate morbidity.
The analyses pertained to 11,013 women. Overall prevalence of episiotomy was 23%: 17% for vacuum (N=7007), 37% for forceps (N=2378), and 29% in case of spatula-assisted (N=1628) delivery. Episiotomy was not associated with significantly decreased obstetric anal sphincter injury occurrence in vacuum delivery (from 5.2% without episiotomy to 3.8%, odds ratio=0.73 [0.48-1.03]) or forceps delivery (from 10.9% without episiotomy to 8.8%, odds ratio=0.81 [0.56-1.14]). In contrast, we observed significantly decreased obstetric anal sphincter injury occurrence (from 9.4% without episiotomy to 5.6%) in spatula delivery (odds ratio=0.60 [0.37-0.87]). Episiotomy was associated with increased maternal morbidity using forceps (from 13.6%-18.3%, odds ratio=1.35 [1.01-1.73]) and spatulas (from 9.0%-13.4%, odds ratio=1.51 [1.11-2.00]). We also observed increased neonatal morbidity in vacuum delivery associated with episiotomy (from 9.1%-13.6%, odds ratio=1.49 [1.21-1.79]), but a decrease in case of forceps delivery with episiotomy (from 12.6%-9.2%, odds ratio=0.74 [0.55-0.95]).
Episiotomy was not associated with a decreased risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury in vacuum or forceps delivery, and a marginal reduction was achieved using spatulas. Our results do not favor extensive episiotomy during instrumental delivery.
ClinicalTrial NCT04446780.
我们缺乏关于器械助产时行会阴切开术预防肛门括约肌损伤的高质量证据,而肛门括约肌损伤的风险最高。
我们的主要目的是根据器械类型评估初产妇在器械助产时会阴切开术对产科肛门括约肌损伤的保护作用。我们还研究了其对产妇和新生儿近期发病率的影响。
我们通过倾向得分加权进行了一项前瞻性比较队列研究以模拟临床试验。该研究特别设计用于考虑可能的混杂因素。这是一项全国性观察性多中心研究,于2021年4月至2022年3月期间纳入了111家法国公立和私立产科单位。我们纳入了妊娠超过34周的初产妇,单胎头位胎儿。我们考虑了真空吸引、产钳和胎头吸引器助产。我们对行会阴切开术和未行会阴切开术的女性进行了比较分析。主要结局是产科肛门括约肌损伤的发生情况。我们对产妇和新生儿近期发病率采用了综合标准。
分析涉及11013名女性。会阴切开术的总体发生率为23%:真空吸引助产时为17%(n = 7007),产钳助产时为37%(n = 2378),胎头吸引器助产时为29%(n = 1628)。会阴切开术与真空吸引助产时产科肛门括约肌损伤发生率显著降低无关(未行会阴切开术时为5.2%,行会阴切开术时为3.8%,比值比 = 0.73 [0.48 - 1.03])或产钳助产时无关(未行会阴切开术时为10.9%,行会阴切开术时为8.8%,比值比 = 0.81 [0.56 - 1.14])。相比之下,我们观察到胎头吸引器助产时产科肛门括约肌损伤发生率显著降低(未行会阴切开术时为9.4%,行会阴切开术时为5.6%)(比值比 = 0.60 [0.37 - 0.87])。会阴切开术与产钳助产时产妇发病率增加有关(从13.6% - 18.3%,比值比 = 1.35 [1.0