Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec;45(4):409-415.
doi: 10.1111/birt.12346. Epub 2018 Mar 14.

Risk and protective factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries: A retrospective nationwide study

Marie-Louise Marschalek  1 , Christof Worda  2 , Lorenz Kuessel  1 , Heinz Koelbl  3 , Willi Oberaigner  4 , Hermann Leitner  4 , Julian Marschalek  1 , Heinrich Husslein  1
Affiliations

Risk and protective factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries: A retrospective nationwide study

Marie-Louise Marschalek et al. Birth. 2018 Dec.

Abstract

Background: In view of the reported increase in obstetric anal sphincter injuries, the objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of such injuries over time and the associated risk and protective factors.

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study from a national database of 168 137 primiparous women with term, singleton, cephalic, vaginal delivery between 2008 and 2014. The main outcome measure was obstetric anal sphincter injury. A multivariate regression model was used to identify risk and protective factors.

Results: Age >19 years, birthweight >4000 g, and operative vaginal delivery were independent risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries. Mediolateral episiotomy increased the risk for obstetric anal sphincter injuries in spontaneous vaginal birth (number needed to harm 333), whereas it was protective in vacuum delivery (number needed to treat 50). From 2008 to 2014, there was an increase in the rate of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (2.1% vs 3.1%, P < .01), vacuum deliveries (12.1% vs 12.8%, P < .01), and cesarean delivery after labor (17.1% vs 19.4%, P < .01), while forceps deliveries (0.4% vs 0.1%, P < .01) and episiotomy rate decreased (35.9% vs 26.4%, P < .01).

Conclusions: Episiotomy may be a risk or protective factor depending on the type of episiotomy and the clinical setting in which it is used. Our study supports a restrictive use of mediolateral episiotomy in spontaneous vaginal deliveries. In vacuum deliveries mediolateral episiotomy may help prevent obstetric anal sphincter injuries.

Keywords: episiotomy; obstetric anal sphincter injury; risk factors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trends in the rates of episiotomy, obstetric anal sphincter injury, cesarean delivery after labor, and forceps and vacuum‐assisted delivery, Austria, 2008‐2014
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Sultan AH. Obstetric perineal injury and anal incontinence. Clin Risk. 1999;5:193‐196.
    1. Vale de Castro Monteiro M, Pereira GM, Aguiar RA, Azevedo RL, Correia‐Junior MD, Reis ZS. Risk factors for severe obstetric perineal lacerations. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27:61‐67. - PubMed
    1. Fernando RJ, Sultan AH, Kettle C, Thakar R. Methods of repair for obstetric anal sphincter injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(12):CD002866. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ott J, Gritsch E, Pils S, et al. A retrospective study on perineal lacerations in vaginal delivery and the individual performance of experienced midwives. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15:270. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Low LK, Zielinski R, Tao Y, Galecki A, Brandon CJ, Miller JM. Predicting birth‐related levator ani tear severity in primiparous women: Evaluating Maternal Recovery from Labor and Delivery (EMRLD Study). Open J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;4:266‐278. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms