4.2 Article

Long-term effects of vacuum extraction on pelvic floor function: a cohort study in primipara

期刊

INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL
卷 27, 期 7, 页码 1051-1056

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-015-2928-x

关键词

Long-term effect; Obstetric sphincter injury; Pelvic floor disorders; Primipara; Vacuum extraction

资金

  1. National LUA/ALF grant [11315]
  2. Region of Vastra Gotaland, Sweden
  3. Goteborg Medical Society
  4. Hjalmar Svenssons Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe the prevalence of symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (sPOP), urinary incontinence (UI), fecal incontinence (FI) and obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) 20 years after one vacuum extraction (VE) delivery compared with one spontaneous vaginal delivery (SVD) or one acute caesarean section (ACS). We performed a register-based national cohort study of primipara who delivered between 1985 and 1988 and had no further deliveries. Medical Birth Register data were linked to data from postal questionnaires distributed 20 years after the birth (response rate 65.2 %, n = 5 236). Main outcome measures were prevalence and risk factors for pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) and OASI and their impact after VE compared with SVD and ACS. Multivariate logistic regression models were used. The late prevalence of UI, sPOP, and FI was almost identical between VE and SVD. VE almost tripled the rate of OASI compared with SVD (6.3 vs. 2.4 %, p < 0.001). FI rate after an OASI was similar for both VE and SVD [30.2 vs. 27.8 %, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.12; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.49-2.56]. Comparing VE without laceration with VE complicated by OASI increased the rate of FI (from 15.4 to 30.2 %, aOR 2.55; 95 % CI 1.26-5.15) and UI (from 39.0 to 61.4 %, aOR 2.28; 95 % CI 1.19-4.34), but the rate of sPOP was almost unaltered (from 15.0 to 15.9 %). VE did not result in additional long-term PFDs provided the rate of OASI was similar to that after SVD. OASI after VE substantially increased the prevalence of FI and UI but did not alter the rate of sPOP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据