4.6 Article

Obstetric factors associated with levator ani muscle injury after vaginal birth

期刊

OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
卷 107, 期 1, 页码 144-149

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000194063.63206.1c

关键词

-

资金

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [R01DK051405] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK051405-04, R01 DK51405] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: To identify obstetric factors associated with development of levator ani injury after vaginal birth. METHODS: Magnetic resonance images were taken of the pelvic floor of 160 women 9 to 12 months after first term vaginal delivery. Half the women had de novo stress incontinence and half were continent controls. Abnormalities of the pubovisceral portion were identified on magnetic resonance as present or absent. Defect severity was further scored in each muscle from 0 (no defect) to 3 (complete muscle loss). A summed score for the 2 sides (0 to 6) was assigned and grouped as minor (0-3) or major (4-6). Obstetric details were collected. The association between obstetric variables and muscle injury were analyzed using Fisher exact test and t tests. RESULTS: The following increased odds ratios for levator defect were found: forceps use 14.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.9-44.3), anal sphincter rupture 8.1 (95% CI 3.3-19.5) and episiotomy 3.1 (95% CI 1.4-7.2) but not vacuum delivery 0.9 (95% CI 0.19-4.3), epidural use 0. 9 (95% CI 0.4-2.0), or oxytocin use 0.8 (95% CI 0.3-1.8). Women with levator injury were 3.5 years older and had a 78-minute longer second stage of labor. Differences in gestational age, birth weight, and head circumference were not statistically significant. A major defect in the pubovisceral muscle was seen in 22 women and a minor defect in 7 women. CONCLUSION: Injuries to the levator ani muscles in women after their first vaginal delivery are associated with several obstetric factors indicating difficult vaginal birth and with older age.

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

4.6
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