4.6 Article

The effects of mediolateral episiotomy on pelvic floor function after vaginal delivery

Journal

OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
Volume 103, Issue 4, Pages 669-673

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000119223.04441.c9

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of mediolateral episiotomy on puerperal pelvic floor strength and dysfunction (urinary and anal incontinence, genital prolapse) METHODS: Five hundred nineteen primiparous women were enrolled 3 months after vaginal delivery. Puerperae were divided in 2 groups: group A (254 women) comprised the women who received mediolateral episiotomy and group B (265 women) the women with intact perineum and first- and second-degree spontaneous perineal lacerations. Each woman was questioned about urogynecological symptoms and examined by digital test, vaginal perineometry, and uroflowmetric stop test score. Data were subjected to Student t test and Fisher exact test to assess, respectively, the difference between the mean values and the proportions within the subpopulations. Using a simple logistic regression model to test an estimate of relative risk, we expressed the odds ratios of the variables considered with respect to the control population (group B). RESULTS: No significant difference was found with regard to the incidence of urinary and anal incontinence and genital prolapse, whereas dyspareunia and perineal pain were significantly higher in die episiotomy group (7.9% versus 3.4%, P = .026; 6.7% versus 2.3%, P = .014, respectively). Episiotomy was associated with significantly lower values, both in digital test (2.2 versus 2.6; P < .001) and in vaginal manometry (12.2 versus 13.8 cm water; P < .001), but not in uroflowmetric stop test. CONCLUSION: Mediolateral episiotomy does not protect against urinary and anal incontinence and genital prolapse and is associated with a lower pelvic floor muscle strength compared with spontaneous perineal lacerations and with more dyspareunia and perineal pain. (C) 2004 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available