Episiotomy: Are Indian Obstetricians Getting the Angle Right?

Background: A mediolateral episiotomy is recommended when indicated at a 60° angle at crowning, to avoid obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) by episiotomies angled too close or distant to the anus. This study surveyed obstetricians in India regarding the recommended episiotomy angle and their ability to correctly draw the angle. Methods: Workshops were conducted in India to share knowledge in the prevention and repair of OASIs. A questionnaire was distributed prior to the workshop. Participants were asked to describe the recommended episiotomy angle and to draw this on a paper replica of the perineum. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to assess the inter-rater reliability between the angle stated and drawn. A 2° difference was deemed acceptable. Standard errors of measurement (SEM) were calculated to measure the range of error of each measurement. Results: One hundred and forty doctors participated. 47.9% described the angle of an episiotomy to be 60°. Only 2.2% drew an angle of 60°, but 8.7% (n = 12) drew between 58 and 62°. Only 5.8% (n = 6) of doctors correctly drew the episiotomy angle they described. There was poor agreement ICC = 0.18 (- 0.01 to 0.36) with a SEM of ± 12.2°. Conclusions: Knowledge surrounding the recommended episiotomy angle is lacking. Doctors are failing to estimate their desired episiotomy angle. This highlights the need for national guidelines, the creation and validation of structured training programmes to improve accuracy, or using fixed-angle devices such as the EPISCISSORS-60 or other proven measurement aids to minimise preventable harm due to human error.

Re-evaluation of modifiable risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injury in a real-world setting.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to identify modifiable risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) in primiparous women. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of primiparous women with a singleton vaginal delivery. Main outcome measures were incidence of OASI and odds ratios for possible risk factors: maternal age, body mass index and height, fetal birthweight and head circumference, gestational age, epidural analgesia, mediolateral episiotomy, and instrumental deliveries. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed using forward methods for variable selection. RESULTS: Of 19,786 primiparous women with a singleton vaginal delivery, 369 sustained an OASI (1.9%). Risk factors were identified: vacuum extraction (adjusted OR 2.06, 95% CI, 1.59-2.65, p < 0.001), increased fetal weight (aOR 1.06, 95% CI, 1.02-1.11, p = 0.002, per 100-g increments); head circumference (aOR 1.24, 95% CI, 1.13-1.35, p < 0.001, per 1-cm increments); gestational week (aOR 1.11, 95% CI, 1.02-1.2, p = 0.012, per week). Protective factors: mediolateral episiotomy (aOR 0.75, 95% CI, 0.59-0.94, p = 0.013) particularly in vacuum deliveries (aOR 0.50, 95% CI, 0.29-0.97, p = 0.040); epidural analgesia (aOR 0.64, 95% CI, 0.48-0.84, p = 0.001); maternal height ≥157 cm (aOR 0.97, 95% CI, 0.96-0.98, p = 0.006, risk decreases by 2.6% per 1 cm increase in height). CONCLUSIONS: Mediolateral episiotomy was protective against OASI in both spontaneous and instrumental deliveries of primiparae. Increased fetal weight and large fetal head circumference, particularly in short women, were significant risk factors. These findings support the performance of ultrasound to acquire updated fetal measures before admission to the labor ward.

Mediolateral/lateral episiotomy with operative vaginal delivery and the risk reduction of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: OASI complicates approximately 6% of vaginal deliveries. This risk is increased with operative vaginal deliveries (OVDs), particularly forceps. However, there is conflicting evidence supporting the use of mediolateral/lateral episiotomy (MLE/LE) with OVD. The aim of this study was to assess whether MLE/LE affects the incidence of OASI in OVD. METHODS: Electronic searches were performed in OVID Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Randomised and non-randomised observational studies investigating the risk of OASI in OVD with/without MLE/LE were eligible for inclusion. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated using Revman 5.3. Risk of bias of was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 and ROBINS-I tool. The quality of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: A total of 703,977 patients from 31 studies were pooled for meta-analysis. MLE/LE significantly reduced the rate of OASI in OVD (OR 0.60 [95% CI 0.42-0.84]). On sub-group analysis, MLE/LE significantly reduced the rate in nulliparous ventouse (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.42-0.84]) and forceps deliveries (OR 0.32 [95% CI 0.29-0.61]). In multiparous women, although the incidence of OASI was lower when a ventouse or forceps delivery was performed with an MLE/LE, this was not statistically significant. Heterogeneity remained significant across all studies (I2 > 50). The quality of all evidence was downgraded to "very low" because of the critical risk of bias across many studies. CONCLUSIONS: MLE/LE may reduce the incidence of OASI in OVDs, particularly in nulliparous ventouse or forceps deliveries. This information will be useful in aiding clinical decision-making and counselling in the antenatal period and during labour.

Attitudes and knowledge regarding episiotomy use and technique in vacuum extraction: A web-based survey among doctors in Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: Correct episiotomy use and technique may prevent obstetric anal sphincter injuries. We aimed to explore the attitudes, use, and technique regarding episiotomy among doctors in Sweden, and their willingness to contribute to a randomized controlled trial of lateral episiotomy or no episiotomy in vacuum extraction in nulliparous women. STUDY DESIGN: A web-based survey was sent to members of the Swedish Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (n = 2140). The survey included 31 questions addressing personal characteristics, use of episiotomy, a two-dimensional picture on which the respondents drew an episiotomy, and questions regarding attitudes towards episiotomy and participation in a randomized controlled trial. We calculated the proportion of supposedly protective episiotomies (fulfilling criteria of a lateral or mediolateral episiotomy and a length ≥ 30 mm). We compared the results between obstetricians, gynecologists, and residents using Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests for differences between groups, and logistic regression to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of drawing a protective episiotomy. RESULTS: We received 432 responses. Doctors without a vacuum delivery in the past year were excluded, leaving 384 respondents for further analyses. In all, 222 (57.8%) doctors reported use of episiotomy in<50% of vacuum extractions. We obtained 308 illustrated episiotomies with a median angle of 53°, incision point distance from the midline of 21 mm, and length of 36 mm, corresponding to a lateral episiotomy. Few doctors combined these parameters correctly resulting in 167 (54.2%) incorrectly drawn episiotomies. Residents drew shorter episiotomies than obstetricians and gynecologists. Doctors ranked episiotomy the least important intervention to prevent obstetric anal sphincter injuries in vacuum extraction. Doctors contributing to an ongoing randomized controlled trial of lateral episiotomy or no episiotomy in vacuum extraction were more able to draw a protective episiotomy (OR 3.69, 95% confidence interval 1.94-7.02). CONCLUSIONS: Doctors in Sweden reported restrictive use of episiotomy in vacuum extraction and depicted lateral type episiotomies, although the majority were incorrectly drawn. Preventive episiotomy was ranked of low importance. Our results imply a need for education, training, and guidelines to increase uptake of correct episiotomy technique, which could result in improved prevention of obstetric anal sphincter injuries.

Is mediolateral episiotomy angle associated with postpartum perineal pain in primiparous women?

OBJECTIVE: Our aim is to elucidate the relationship between mediolateral episiotomy (MLE) angle and postpartum perineal pain. METHODS: This study was designed prospectively. Primiparous women with MLE in the postpartum period were included in the study and divided into three groups according to episiotomy angle ranges (Group 1: <40°, Group 2: 40°-60°, and Group 3: >60°). Postpartum perineal pain was quantified with the short-form McGill Pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ) consisting of the following three parts: Sensory-affective-verbal descriptions, visual pain scale (VPS), and present pain intensity scale (PPI). Postpartum perineal pain scores on days 1 and 7 were compared among the angle group. RESULTS: Overall, 86 eligible women were enrolled in this study. Seventy-three women (85%) scored the perineal pain between 0 and 3 on the VPS and 13 women (15%) rated the pain from 4 to 6 on the 1st postpartum day. No significant differences were noted among the three groups regarding the total pain scores on SF-MPQ and on the each part of form at the 1st postpartum day. At 7 days postpartum, total pain score was found significantly high in Group 1 [Med; IQR (min-max)=0; 4 (0-5)] compared with Group 2 [Med; IQR (min-max)=0; 0(0-5)]. The pain scores obtained from the sensory, affective, VPS, and PPI parts of the questionnaire were [Med; IQR (min-max)=0; 1 (0-2)], [Med; IQR (min-max)=0; 1 (0-1)], [Med; IQR (min-max)=0; 2 (0-2)], and [Med; IQR (min-max)=0; 0.25 (0-1)], respectively, in Group 1. For Group 2, pain scores obtained from the sensory, affective, and PPI were [Med; IQR (min-max)=0; 0(0-1)]; and VPS was [Med; IQR (min-max)=0; 0(0-2)]. No significant differences were observed between Groups 1 and 2 for each part of the questionnaire on day 7. Percentage of need for analgesics on day 7 was found significantly higher in Group 1 (42.9%) than Group 2 (31.2%). CONCLUSION: MLE at an angle <40° to the midline is associated with a higher score of perineal pain and an increase need for analgesics during the early postpartum days.

Midline and Mediolateral Episiotomy: Risk Assessment Based on Clinical Anatomy.

Episiotomy is the surgical incision of the vaginal orifice and perineum to ease the passage of an infant's head while crowning during vaginal delivery. Although episiotomy remains one of the most frequently performed surgeries around the world, short- and long-term complications from the procedure are not uncommon. We performed midline and mediolateral episiotomies with the aim of correlating commonly diagnosed postepisiotomy complications with risk of injury to perineal neuromuscular and erectile structures. We performed 61 incisions on 47 female cadavers and dissected around the incision site. Dissections revealed that midline incisions did not bisect any major neuromuscular structures, although they did increase the risk of direct and indirect injury to the subcutaneous portion of the external anal sphincter. Mediolateral incisions posed greater risk of iatrogenic injury to ipsilateral nerve, muscle, erectile, and gland tissues. Clinician discretion is advised when weighing the potential risks to maternal perineal anatomy during vaginal delivery when episiotomy is indicated. If episiotomy is warranted, an understanding of perineal anatomy may benefit diagnosis of postsurgical complications.

Mediolateral Episiotomy: Technique, Practice, and Training.

Episiotomy is one of the most common obstetric procedures. However, restrictive use of episiotomy has led to a decrease in its use in the United States. Historically, mediolateral episiotomy has been performed less often than median episiotomy in the United States, but both have purported advantages and disadvantages. Emerging research on episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injuries has led to an examination of the effects of mediolateral episiotomy. This article describes performance of a mediolateral episiotomy in a situation of fetal bradycardia. Technical aspects of the incision and repair are described, and outcome data and knowledge gaps are summarized. Implications for practice, clinical competency, and education are reviewed.

Maternal outcomes in subsequent delivery after previous obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI): a multi-centre retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Women with a history of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) are at increased risk of recurrence (rOASI) at subsequent delivery; however, evidence regarding the factors influencing this risk is limited. Furthermore, little is known about what factors influence the decision to alternatively deliver by elective caesarean section (ELLSCS). METHODS: Retrospective univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of prospectively collected data from four NHS electronic maternity databases including primiparous women sustaining OASIS during a singleton, term, cephalic, vaginal delivery between 2004 and 2015, who had a subsequent delivery. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred seventy-two women met the criteria; 10.2% delivering vaginally had a repeat OASI and 59.4% had a second-degree tear. Women having an ELLSCS were more likely to be Caucasian, older, have previously had an operative vaginal delivery (OVD) and have a more severe degree of OASI. Positive predictors for rOASI were increased birth weight and maternal age at both index and subsequent deliveries, a more severe degree of initial OASI and Asian ethnicity. The overall mediolateral episiotomy (MLE) rate was 15.6%; 77.2% of those who had an episiotomy sustained no spontaneous perineal trauma. Only 4.4% of women with a rOASI had an MLE, whilst the MLE rate was 16.9% in those without a recurrence (p < 0.001). MLE decreased the risk of rOASI by 80%. Birth weight > 4 kg increased the risk 2.5 fold. CONCLUSIONS: Women with previous OASIS are at an increased risk of recurrence. A more liberal use of MLE during subsequent vaginal delivery could significantly reduce the risk of recurrence.

The role of mediolateral episiotomy during operative vaginal delivery.

The role of episiotomy with regard to prevention of anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) is under discussion. The recently published guideline of the WHO "Intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience" states that the role of episiotomy during operative vaginal deliveries remains to be established. This guideline is based on the evidence coming from randomised clinical trials. However, since the turn of the century large observational studies have pointed out that adequately performed mediolateral episiotomies may play an important role in the prevention of OASIS during operative vaginal deliveries. In this paper we present this evidence and plead for a broader vision on, and use of other evidence than randomised clinical trials solely, the preventive role of mediolateral episiotomy with regard to the occurrence of OASIS.

Risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries at vaginal birth after caesarean: a retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is associated with an increased risk of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS). However, specific factors that influence the risk of OASIS at VBAC have not been studied, particularly whether there are specific baseline characteristics of the first delivery which affect the subsequent perineal outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from University of Southampton NHS Foundation Trusts' maternity database. This included secundiparous women with a previous caesarean delivery (CS) who achieved a singleton, term, cephalic vaginal delivery from 2004 to 2014. Univariate analysis compared maternal, intrapartum and neonatal factors of those who suffered OASIS at VBAC with those who did not. A binary logistic regression model calculated the adjusted, independent odds ratio (OR) of OASIS. RESULTS: A total of 1375 women met the inclusion criteria. The OASIS rate was 8.1%, a 1.4-fold increase compared with primiparous women [difference 2.4% (95% CI 1.1, 3.6)]. Those sustaining OASIS at VBAC were older (p = 0.011) and had infants of greater birth weight at initial caesarean (p < 0.001) and VBAC (p = 0.04). Analysis of odds ratios revealed that mediolateral episiotomy (MLE) at VBAC halved the risk of OASIS [37.5% VBAC with OASIS vs. 52.2% VBAC without OASIS (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.81)], whereas an urgent CS at initial delivery doubled the risk [52.3% VBAC with OASIS vs. 34.9% VBAC without OASIS (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.31-3.21)]. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced maternal age, increased infant birth weight and an urgent category of initial CS increase the risk of OASIS at VBAC, whereas MLE is protective.

Use of vacuum-assisted closure in massive puerperal genital hematoma.

Puerperal genital hematomas are rare but life-threatening complications of obstetric emergencies. A pregnant patient (39 weeks) underwent a mediolateral episiotomy during a vaginal delivery. An afterbirth hematoma (approximately 20 cm in diameter) was evacuated, but the use of a vacuum-assisted wound closure system was applied after the sutures opened on the 7th postoperative day. On the 10th day of the vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) application, the wound was completely closed. VAC is an alternative treatment modality that can drain an infection and increase the proportion of granulation tissue in humid and irregular surfaces such as the perineum.

Which characteristics of the episiotomy and perineum are associated with a lower risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury in instrumental deliveries.

OBJETIVE: Operative vaginal delivery (OVD) is the most important risk fact for obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI). Knowledge of possible risk factors for their occurrence may therefore reduce the likelihood of faecal incontinence. The aim is to analyse the effect of mediolateral episitomy and perineum characteristics on the occurrence of OASI in OVD. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study, which included 958 OVD that were reviewed in Pelvic Floor and Puerperium Clinic. The episiotomy and perineum characteristics of those women who experienced OASIs (n = 150) were compared with those who had no evidence of anal sphincter injury (n = 788). RESULTS: In multivariate logistic regression analysis the factors which were independently associated were nulliparity, persistent occipitoposterior position, birthweight >3500 g, an angle of episiotomy <30°, a distance episiotomy-fourchette <5 mm and a distance of perineal body <30 mm. The analysis of subgroups show that only the multiparous women does not benefit from any feature of the episiotomy, and an angle greater than 30° and a distance episiotomy-fourchette >5 mm are associated with a risk reduction of OASI in nulliparous, perineal bodies ≤30 mm and occipitoanterior position. CONCLUSIONS: Two modifiable risk factors at the time of performing the episiotomy, the angle and distance episiotomy-fourchette, have been identified as the risk modification of OASI. It is necessary to achieve an adequate angle to reduce the probability of OASIs in OVD, and in nulliparous women with an anterior position and a distance of perineal body ≤30 mm could benefit from increasing the episiotomy-fourchette distance.

Management of the Perineum during Delivery with the Kiwi Omnicup: Effects of Mediolateral Episiotomy on Anal Sphincter Tears in Nulliparous Women.

AIM: The main objective of this study was to evaluate the association of mediolateral episiotomy with severe perineal trauma during Kiwi omnicup vacuum delivery. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed all Kiwi omnicup vacuum deliveries between 2010 and 2015 in nulliparous women. Secondary outcomes of interest included frequency of genital tract trauma, outcome of Kiwi extraction and influence on neonatal parameters. RESULTS: A total of 572 nulliparous women who were delivered with the aid of vacuum were analyzed. Successful completion of birth was achieved in 549/572 (96%) resulting in a failure rate of 4%. Out of 572 women, 372 (65%) underwent the Kiwi vacuum delivery system in conjunction with episiotomy. Third- or fourth-degree perineal tears occurred in 38 out of the 572 (6.6%) women and the rate of severe perineal trauma was statistically and significantly lower in women who delivered with the aid of the Kiwi vacuum in conjunction with episiotomy (p = 0.0001). Besides, perineal tears of all degrees, vaginal tears and labial trauma were significantly less common in the Kiwi vacuum delivery system when combined with mediolateral episiotomy (p = 0.0001, p = 0.006, and p = 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our data showed that the performance of a mediolateral episiotomy was associated with a decreased risk of severe perineal tears as well as vaginal and labial trauma in Kiwi omnicup vacuum deliveries.

The optimal angle of the mediolateral episiotomy at crowning of the head during labor.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of the mediolateral episiotomy incision is to increase the diameter of the soft tissue of the vaginal outlet to facilitate birth and to prevent vaginal tears. Episiotomy angles that are too narrow and close to the midline increase the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injuries. In order to determine the optimal angle of the episiotomy, we assessed the changes in the angles of episiotomy lines marked during the first stage of labor and measured at the time of crowning of the head. METHODS: Incision lines for mediolateral episiotomy were marked on the perineal skin at angles of 30°, 45°, and 60° from the midline during the first stage of labor in women with a singleton pregnancy. The angles of the marked lines were measured at crowning of the head. Mediolateral episiotomy was performed only for obstetric indications. RESULTS: The study included 102 women with a singleton pregnancy. Of these women, 50 were primiparous and 52 were multiparous. All angles marked during the first stage of labor increased significantly (by more than 30°) at crowning of the head. Similar changes were observed in primiparous and multiparous women. CONCLUSIONS: The angle of the mediolateral episiotomy line was significantly greater at crowning of the head than when marked during the first stage of labor. To achieve the desired episiotomy angle, it is important to take into consideration the changes in mediolateral episiotomy angles that occur during labor.

Impact of mediolateral episiotomy on incidence of obstetrical anal sphincter injury diagnosed by endoanal ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: to examine potential association between mediolateral episiotomy and reduced incidence of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) diagnosed by endoanal ultrasound. DESIGN: prospective cohort study. SETTING: tertiary referral university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: sixty nulliparous women at 28-33 weeks of gestation with singleton pregnancies were included between 2010 and 2012. MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: participants were examined with endoanal ultrasound at 28-33 weeks gestation and at 6-7 weeks post-partum. At both visits, symptoms of anal incontinence were assessed using Cleveland Clinic (Wexner) faecal incontinence scoring system. Mann Whitney U-test and χ2 test was used to compare groups with vs. without episiotomy and groups with vs. without OASIS diagnosed by ultrasound. χ2 test was used to assess correlation between OASIS and anal incontinence symptoms (p≤0.05 considered significant). None of the women included had sphincter injury or anal incontinence before childbirth. All delivered vaginally. Mediolateral episiotomy was performed in 33 (55%) cases. Six (10%) had OASIS on endoanal ultrasound (two were also diagnosed clinically), and 11 had symptoms of anal incontinence post-partum. No significant differences were seen in clinical characteristics between groups with vs. without episiotomy. No significant differences were seen in episiotomy rate (p=0.14), angle (p=0.42) and length (p=0.14) between groups with vs. without OASIS on ultrasound. Correlation between anal incontinence symptoms and sonographically diagnosed OASIS was statistically significant (p=0.04). KEY CONCLUSIONS: mediolateral episiotomy does not seem to be protective against clinically or sonographically diagnosed OASIS even when episiotomy technique is considered. Endoanal ultrasound allows a significantly better detection of symptomatic OASIS compared to clinical examination alone. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: mediolateral episiotomy should be considered only when shortening the second stage of labour is indicated due to foetal distress, and not as a means of OASIS prevention.

Episiotomy - risk factors and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for mediolateral episiotomy, and evaluate the risk of obstetrical anal sphincter injury (OASI) among women with an episiotomy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all singletons vaginal deliveries at term between 2007 and 2014. Spontaneous and operative vaginal deliveries were compared separately, as well as nulliparous and multiparous women. RESULTS: Overall, 41,347 women were included in the spontaneous vaginal delivery group: 12,585 (30.4%) nulliparous and 28,762 (69.6%) multiparous women. Risk factors for episiotomy (nulliparous) were maternal age (aOR 0.98), gestational age (GA, aOR 1.07), regional analgesia (RA, aOR 1.18), labor induction (aOR 1.17), meconium (aOR 1.37) and birth weight (BW, aOR 1.04). Episiotomy was associated with PPH (aOR 1.49). Among multiparous, risk factors were maternal age (aOR 1.04), previous vaginal delivery (aOR 0.38), GA (aOR 1.06), RA (aOR 1.22), meconium (aOR 1.22) and BW (aOR 1.05). Episiotomy was associated with 3rd degree perineal tear (aOR 2.26, 95% CI 1.03-4.97). Only birth weight (nulliparous) and previous vaginal deliveries (multiparous) were contributors for episiotomy in the OVD group. CONCLUSION: Several risk factors for mediolateral episiotomy exist. Episiotomy does not protect nulliparous women, and may be associated with an increased risk for multiparous, for OASI. Therefore, the practice of routine episiotomy should be abandoned, and the practice of selective episiotomy reconsidered.

Comparative study of episiotomy angles achieved by cutting with straight Mayo scissors and the EPISCISSORS-60 in a birth simulation model.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We compared the clinician's ability to cut episiotomies at the recommended 60° angle with traditional straight Mayo scissors compared with patented fixed-angle episiotomy scissors EPISCISSORS-60® in a simulated setting using mounted incision pads. The hypothesis was that fixed-angle episiotomies would achieve a more accurate cutting angle of 60°. METHODS: Angles were cut on episiotomy incision pads in a mounted birth model simulating crowning: 110 midwives and doctors cut an 60° episiotomy with Mayo scissors and then EPISCISSORS-60. Angles were measured with protractors. Average angles were calculated and the one-tailed paired t test was used to compare groups. RESULTS: Mean angle was 45° with Mayo scissors [SD = 9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 43.3-46.7, interquartile range (IQR) 38-50] and 60° with the EPISCISSORS-60 (SD = 3, 95% CI = 59.3-60.7, IQR = 58-60). Two-thirds of cuts with Mayo scissors were below 50°. CONCLUSIONS: In a simulated setting the majority of operators are unable to cut an episiotomy at the recommended 60° angle with Mayo scissors. The EPISCISSORS-60 cut an episiotomy a statistically significant 15° wider than regular Mayo scissors and achieved the recommended 60° in the vast majority of cases. If these findings translate into real life situations, then cutting episiotomies at 60° is expected to make a valuable contribution in reducing third- and fourth-degree tears in both spontaneous and operative vaginal deliveries. Variability in mediolateral episiotomies should be reduced by use of fixed-angle scissors or through validated health professional training programmes to improve visual accuracy.

Behavior of perineum during delivery before fetal head expulsion.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to describe perineum deformation during the final part of delivery and suggest a modification of the episiotomy cut to increase accuracy for obtaining a suitable angle (45°) for surgical wound suture. METHODS: This prospective study enrolled 45 primiparous women. The perineum at rest was marked with five lines (0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 90°), and each line was marked with two dots (point A-B: to 2-3 cm from initial point in fourchette, respectively). Two digital pictures were taken: one with the women at rest and the second during fetal head crowning; displacements were calculated for each point and angle. RESULTS: When the perineum is distending, the initial point of every line in the posterior fourchette moves laterally in introitus (only the 0° line remains at midline). The angle and the distance to points A and B of each line drawn do not change significantly from at rest to crowning. However, comparing original line configuration with an imaginary line from the fourchette to points A and B before expulsion, the angle and the distance is increased statistically significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Perineal distension at the moment of fetal head crowning causes a linear displacement of the perineum, which causes the difference in angle between the incision and episiotomy suture. Therefore, to obtain an episiotomy suture from fourchette with an angle of 45°, theoretically, we would have several angle incision options (between 45° and 60°), with a less acute angle when the introitus cut is closer to the fourchette (45° to 6 mm and ∼60° in the fourchette) and a sharper angle with a longer episiotomy.

Mediolateral versus lateral episiotomy and their effect on postpartum coital activity and dyspareunia rate 3 and 6 months postpartum.

OBJECTIVES: Comparison of the effects of two episiotomy types on sexual activity, dyspareunia and overall satisfaction after childbirth. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective follow-up study of a randomized comparative trial evaluating peripartum outcome of a vaginal delivery after mediolateral (MLE) or lateral (LE) episiotomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The participants completed questionnaires regarding sexual activity, dyspareunia, perineal pain, aesthetic appearance and overall satisfaction 3 (3M) and 6 months (6M) postpartum. RESULTS: A total of 648 women were available for the analyses (306 MLE, 342 LE). The groups showed no difference regarding resumption and regularity of sex, timing of resumption, frequency and intensity of dyspareunia, perineal pain, aesthetic appearance or overall satisfaction 3M or 6M postpartum. 98.0% of women after MLE and 97.7% after LE resumed sexual intercourse within 6M after delivery (p = 0.74). In the same period 15.6% of women after MLE and 16.1% after LE suffered from considerable dyspareunia (p = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Quality of sexual life and perception of perineal pain after MLE is equivalent to LE.

Obstetric anal sphincter injuries after episiotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is conflicting evidence on whether mediolateral episiotomy (MLE) reduces the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASI) in spontaneous vaginal deliveries (SVD). OBJECTIVES: A systematic review was undertaken to compare rates of OASI amongst women who had undergone mediolateral episiotomy versus those who did not. METHODS: ᅟ SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches were performed in literature databases: CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, Medline and MIDIRS from database inception to July 2015. Studies were eligible if MLE was compared to spontaneous tears and if OASI was the outcome of interest. Two reviewers independently selected and extracted data on study characteristics, quality and results. We computed events of OASI in those who did and did not have an episiotomy from individual studies and pooled these results in a meta-analysis where possible. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 2090 citations, 16 were included in the review. All were non-randomised, population based or retrospective cohort studies. There was great variation in quality amongst these studies. Data from 7 studies was used for meta-analysis. On collating data from these studies where the majority of women (636755/651114) were nulliparous, MLE reduced the risk of OASI (RR 0.67 95 % CI 0.49-0.92) in vaginal delivery. CONCLUSION: The pooled analysis of a large number of women undergoing vaginal birth, most of who were nulliparous, indicates that MLE has a beneficial effect in prevention of OASI. An accurately given MLE might have a role in reducing OASI and should not be withheld, especially in nulliparous women. Caution is advised as the data is from non-randomised studies.