Obstetric risk factors for levator ani muscle avulsion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Women have a 11% lifetime risk of undergoing surgery for vaginal prolapse. Levator ani muscle (LAM) avulsion is one etiological factor associated with primary and recurrent pelvic organ prolapse. Pelvic organ prolapse has been shown to greatly affect the quality of life and well-being of women. Conduct a meta-analysis identifying risk factors associated with LAM avulsion recognised on transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in primiparous women after vaginal birth. STUDY DESIGN: OVID Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 2021 were searched. Review Manager 5.3 (The Cochrane Collaboration) was used to analyse data. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. The heterogeneity among studies was calculated using the I2statistic. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were eligible for inclusion (n = 9333 women). Major LAM avulsion was diagnosed in an average of 22 % (range 12.7-39.5 %) of cases. Twenty-two studies used TPUS and three used MRI to diagnose avulsion. Modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors were identified. Significant predictors identified were forceps (OR 6.25 [4.33 - 9.0]), obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OR 3.93 [2.85-5.42]), vacuum (OR 2.41 [1.40-4.16]), and maternal age (OR 1.06 [1.02-1.10]). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first meta-analysis of both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors associated with LAM avulsion. This information could be used to develop a clinically applicable risk prediction model to target postnatal women at risk of LAM avulsion with a view to prevent the onset of pelvic floor organ prolapse.

The prevention of perineal trauma during vaginal birth.

Perineal trauma after vaginal birth is common, with approximately 9 of 10 women being affected. Second-degree perineal tears are twice as likely to occur in primiparous births, with a incidence of 40%. The incidence of obstetrical anal sphincter injury is approximately 3%, with a significantly higher rate in primiparous than in multiparous women (6% vs 2%). Obstetrical anal sphincter injury is a significant risk factor for the development of anal incontinence, with approximately 10% of women developing symptoms within a year following vaginal birth. Obstetrical anal sphincter injuries have significant medicolegal implications and contribute greatly to healthcare costs. For example, in 2013 and 2014, the economic burden of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries in the United Kingdom ranged between £3.7 million (with assisted vaginal birth) and £9.8 million (with spontaneous vaginal birth). In the United States, complications associated with trauma to the perineum incurred costs of approximately $83 million between 2007 and 2011. It is therefore crucial to focus on improvements in clinical care to reduce this risk and minimize the development of perineal trauma, particularly obstetrical anal sphincter injuries. Identification of risk factors allows modification of obstetrical practice with the aim of reducing the rate of perineal trauma and its attendant associated morbidity. Risk factors associated with second-degree perineal trauma include increased fetal birthweight, operative vaginal birth, prolonged second stage of labor, maternal birth position, and advanced maternal age. With obstetrical anal sphincter injury, risk factors include induction of labor, augmentation of labor, epidural, increased fetal birthweight, fetal malposition (occiput posterior), midline episiotomy, operative vaginal birth, Asian ethnicity, and primiparity. Obstetrical practice can be modified both antenatally and intrapartum. The evidence suggests that in the antenatal period, perineal massage can be commenced in the third trimester of pregnancy to increase muscle elasticity and allow stretching of the perineum during birth, thereby reducing the risk of tearing or need for episiotomy. With regard to the intrapartum period, there is a growing body of evidence from the United Kingdom, Norway, and Denmark suggesting that the implementation of quality improvement initiatives including the training of clinicians in manual perineal protection and mediolateral episiotomy can reduce the incidence of obstetrical anal sphincter injury. With episiotomy, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics recommends restrictive rather than routine use of episiotomy. This is particularly the case with unassisted vaginal births. However, there is a role for episiotomy, specifically mediolateral or lateral, with assisted vaginal births. This is specifically the case with nulliparous vacuum and forceps births, given that the use of mediolateral or lateral episiotomy has been shown to significantly reduce the incidence of obstetrical anal sphincter injury in these groups by 43% and 68%, respectively. However, the complications associated with episiotomy including perineal pain, dyspareunia, and sexual dysfunction should be acknowledged. Despite considerable research, interventions for reducing the risk of perineal trauma remain a subject of controversy. In this review article, we present the available data on the prevention of perineal trauma by describing the risk factors associated with perineal trauma and interventions that can be implemented to prevent perineal trauma, in particular obstetrical anal sphincter injury.

UK survey of colorectal surgeons on the management of acute obstetric anal sphincter injuries.

AIM: The role of colorectal surgeons in the management of acute obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) is an ongoing debate. Their expertise in operating in the anorectal region lends itself to assisting in OASI repair. The aim of this study was to establish the current involvement and recommended management of acute OASI by colorectal surgeons. METHOD: An online survey of consultant colorectal surgeons was sent to members of the Pelvic Floor Society to assess current involvement in acute OASI management and repair. RESULTS: Forty completed surveys were collated and analysed. Sixty-five per cent of respondents had seen an acute OASI since being a consultant and 50% stated they were involved in the repair of OASI less than once per year. 37.5% felt that a de-functioning stoma was still necessary sometimes. Many agreed with current guidelines for OASI repair in terms of antibiotics, laxatives and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal surgeons have varied opinions on the management of OASI. We suggest that multidisciplinary training of obstetricians and colorectal surgeons could lead to more collaboration regarding the management of women with acute OASI.

Diagnosis, management and training in perineal trauma: a UK national survey of obstetricians.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Perineal trauma during vaginal delivery is very common. Training in diagnosis and repair of trauma, including obstetric anal sphincter injuries, varies in the UK. We aimed to investigate the current knowledge and training received by obstetric physicians. METHODS: A national, validated survey was conducted online, using Qualtrics. The National Trainees Committee distributed the survey. It was also sent directly to consultants via email. RESULTS: A total of 302 physicians completed the survey and were included in the analysis. 3.9% of participants described their training in obstetric perineal trauma as "very poor" or "poor". 20.5% said they have not received training. 8.6% of physicians practising for more than 10 years had not had training for over 10 years. 70.5% responded "somewhat agree" or "strongly agree" when asked if they would like more training. Identification of first, second, third-, and fourth-degree tears from images and descriptions was very good (more than 80% correct for all categories). Classification of other perineal trauma was less consistent, with many incorrectly using the Sultan Classification. "Manual perineal support" and "Controlled or guided delivery" were the most frequently selected methods for the prevention of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI). CONCLUSIONS: Training experience for physicians in obstetric perineal trauma varies. Further improvement in training and education in perineal trauma, particularly in OASI, is needed for physicians. Perineal trauma that is not included in the Sultan Classification is often misclassified.

Postpartum perineal wound infection and its effect on anal sphincter integrity: Results of a prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Perineal wound infection can affect tissues at superficial, deep, and organ space levels. Women with obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) are at risk of infection; however, no study to date has investigated if infection can extend to affect the anal sphincter integrity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical progression of perineal wound infection and its effect on the anal sphincter in women with or without OASIS using three-dimensional endoanal ultrasound (3D-EAUS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Women were recruited into the Prospective Observational Study Evaluating the Sonographic Appearance of the Anal Sphincter in Women With Perineal Wound Infection Following Vaginal Delivery (PERINEAL Study) between August 2020 and August 2021 (NCT04480684). 3D-EAUS was performed weekly until complete wound healing. Significant bacterial colonization was diagnosed using the MolecuLight i:X camera. The primary study outcome was a change in a sphincter defect angle from baseline (wound infection) until wound healing. A robust Poisson regression model was used to analyze the effect of significant bacterial loads on the anal sphincter. RESULTS: Seventy-three women were included. A median of two ultrasound scans were performed in each patient (range 1-16). Five women (6.8%) had an OASI clinically diagnosed at delivery. In total, 250 EAUS were performed. An external anal sphincter defect was found on EAUS in 55 (22.0%) scans (n = 10 women). An external anal sphincter and internal anal sphincter defect was found in 26 scans (10.4%) (n = 3 women). During the course of the wound healing process, there was no significant change in defect size in wounds with or without significant bacterial colonization. In cases of an intact anal sphincter, wound infection did not disrupt its integrity. CONCLUSIONS: We found that perineal wound infection does not disrupt an intact anal sphincter or OASIS. This new information can provide important information for clinicians and patients. As there are myths frequently encountered in cases of litigation when disruption of sphincter integrity is attributed to perineal infection, the findings of this study should be tested in larger studies in the future.

Getting the size right: Are clinicians ready for it?

Objectives Digital examination has many uses in obstetrics and gynaecology, including cervical assessment in labour and measuring for vaginal pessaries. Clinicians must be adequately trained to perform accurate digital assessments and use this information to make decisions. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of a clinician's estimate for three different measuring tasks and assess whether there was any difference in the accuracy in relation to seniority or job role. Study design Doctors and midwives were recruited from two perineal trauma training events. Estimates and measurements for three different activities were recorded: length of own index finger, length of an anal sphincter model and cervical dilatation at two different dilatations (7 cm and 9 cm) using a pocket guide cervical dilatation tool. The results were analysed for accuracy of measurements according to job role and seniority. Results A total of 369 participants took part. Only 4.6% of participants accurately (to 0.1 cm) estimated the length of their index finger (0% of midwives and 5.5% of doctors). There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) when comparing average differences between estimated and actual lengths measured for doctors and midwives for almost all measurements. When comparing doctors based on seniority there was no significant difference in the accuracy of estimated lengths. A higher percentage of midwives than doctors were accurate at both 7 cm (22% vs 16.1%) and 9 cm (30.5% vs 29.5%) dilated. Conclusion We found that accuracy was poor for both doctors and midwives when asked to estimate various measurements. We suggest that training will improve awareness of finger length and therefore improve accuracy when performing digital examinations in clinical practice.

The incidence of anal incontinence following obstetric anal sphincter injury graded using the Sultan classification: a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically determine and compare the incidence of anal incontinence between those with different grades of obstetric anal sphincter injury. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 to April 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Observational studies investigating the incidence of anal incontinence following an obstetric anal sphincter injury that was graded using the Sultan classification were eligible for inclusion. To allow comparison between individual tear grades (3a, 3b, 3c, fourth), a network meta-analysis was performed using Stata (version 15.1). METHODS: For binary outcomes, odds ratios with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were reported. Obstetric anal sphincter injury grades were ranked from the best clinical outcome to the worst clinical outcome. The percentage chance of each grade taking each rank with regards to outcome was calculated. Study quality and risk of bias was assessed using the relevant tool from the Joanna Briggs Institute. RESULTS: Of the 696 studies identified, 10 were eligible for inclusion and were included in the network meta-analysis (n=2467 women). The mean incidence of anal incontinence among those with 3a tears was 22.4% (range, 6.1%-51.2%), 24.9% (range, 6.9%-46.7%) among those with 3b tears, 26.8% (range, 0%-55.6%) among those with 3c tears, and 28.6% (0%-71.4%) among those with fourth-degree tears. Anal incontinence incidence was found to be significantly higher among those with 3c (odds ratio, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-2.94) and fourth-degree tears (odds ratio, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-4.02) than among those with 3a tears. In addition, anal incontinence incidence was significantly higher among those with fourth-degree tears (odds ratio, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-3.22) than among those with 3b tears. Those with 3a tears had the highest probability of having the best clinical outcome; those with 3b; second-, 3c; third- and fourth-degree tears had the highest probability of having the worst clinical outcome. Overall, all studies had a high or unclear risk of bias across 1 or more assessed element. CONCLUSION: This was a network meta-analysis comparing the incidence of anal incontinence among those with different grades of obstetric anal sphincter injury. Increasing tear-grade severity is associated with worse clinical outcomes. This study provides useful, clinically applicable information that can assist clinicians in the counseling of women following an obstetric anal sphincter injury. In addition, it highlights the importance of accurately diagnosing the obstetric anal sphincter injury grade and subsequently performing the appropriate repair.

Bacterial autofluorescence in infected perineal wounds: A prospective cohort study.

Diagnosis of perineal wound infection based solely on clinical signs and symptoms is subjective, and often incorrectly identifies wounds with clinically significant bacterial loads. New advances in wound care such as bacterial fluorescence imaging allow point-of -care assessment of bacterial burden. This single-center, prospective observational study included 80 women with perineal wound infection and aimed to determine the incidence of significant bacterial colonization identified with bacterial fluorescence imaging. Also, to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of bacterial fluorescence imaging. 30 women (37.5%) had fluorescence in their wounds despite antibiotic therapy. The sensitivity of bacterial fluorescence imaging in the diagnosis of wounds with a clinically significant bacterial burden was 83% and specificity was 90%. The positive predictive value was 92% and negative predictive value was 80%. Overall, diagnostic accuracy was substantial. The results of this study demonstrate that bacterial fluorescence imaging can provide real-time information surrounding the bacterial burden of perineal wounds. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04480684.

Can transperineal ultrasound improve the diagnosis of obstetric anal sphincter injuries?

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Women with missed obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) are at an increased risk of anal incontinence. Our aim was to assess the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) compared with clinical examination for detecting OASIs. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of women undergoing their first vaginal delivery. Perineal trauma was initially assessed by the doctor or midwife performing the delivery (accoucheur) and women were then re-examined by the trained research fellow (KW). A 3D TPUS was performed immediately after delivery before suturing to identify OASIs. The research fellow's clinical diagnosis was used as the reference standard. A power calculation determined that 216 women would be required for the study. RESULTS: Two hundred and sixty-four women participated and 226 (86%) delivered vaginally. Twenty-one (9%) sustained OASIs. Six (29%) of these tears were missed by the accoucheur but were identified by the research fellow. TPUS identified 19 of the 21 (90.5%) OASIs. One percent (n = 2) had sonographic appearances of an anal sphincter defect that was not seen clinically. The positive and negative predictive value of TPUS to detect OASIs was 91% and 99% respectively. TPUS identified 91% of OASIs compared with 71% detected by the accoucheur, which was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The detection rate of OASIs with TPUS and with the clinical findings of the accoucheur was similar. Given the training and financial implications needed for TPUS, attention needs to be focused on the training of midwives and doctors to identify anal sphincter injuries by clinical examination.

The clinical progression and wound healing rate of dehisced perineal tears healing by secondary intention: A prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To establish the clinical progression of dehisced perineal wounds healing by secondary intention and to investigate the incidence and factors associated with delayed healing. METHODS: Secondary analysis of women with perineal wound dehiscence recruited into the PERINEAL study between August 2020- August 2021 (NCT04480684). Three-dimensional wound measurements were taken with the Silhouette® camera. Significant bacterial colonisation was diagnosed using the MolecuLight i:X camera. As it is agreed that acute wounds should heal sufficiently within four weeks, diagnosis of delayed wound healing was made if a wound took longer than four weeks to heal. A wound was deemed to have healed if there was complete wound closure, with no evidence of granulation tissue or signs of infection on clinical examination. RESULTS: 55 women with perineal wound dehiscence participated. Wounds took an average of 3 weeks to heal (range 1-16) and 38 (69.1%) wounds healed in ≤ 4 weeks from the first clinical review. 17 (30.9%) wounds had significant bacterial colonisation, identified on bacterial fluorescence imaging. Women with a wound area of < 1.60 cm2 or wound perimeter of < 5.57 cm had a 70% probability of wound healing in ≤ 4 weeks. 47.1% of wounds with significant bacteria colonisation healed within 4 weeks, in comparison to 78.9% of wounds not colonised (p = 0.03). 25.0 % (n = 2) of wounds with OASI healed within 4 weeks, in comparison to 76.5% (n = 36) of wounds with no OASI (p = 0.02). Bacterial fluorescence (OR 0.21 (0.05-0.87)) and OASIs (OR 0.09 (0.01-0.66)) were independent risk factors associated with delayed wound healing. The model including wound area, fluorescence and OASIs had the greatest AUC (0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.94) indicating the best predictive model. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to describe healing outcomes of dehisced perineal wounds and factors associated with delayed healing. The study findings will help clinicians counsel women effectively and tailor follow-up care at the first assessment, based on individual risk factors.

The incidence of wound complications following primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to systematically determine the incidences of wound infection and dehiscence after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, EmCare, the Cochrane Library, and Trip Pro databases were searched from inception to February 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included observational clinical studies reporting the incidences of wound infection and dehiscence after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair. Case series and reports were excluded. Conference articles and observational study abstracts were included if they contained enough information regarding study design and outcome data. METHODS: Data were analyzed as incidence (percentage) with 95% confidence intervals. Moreover, the prediction intervals were calculated to provide a predicted range for the potential incidence of wound complications when applied to an individual study setting. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the relevant tool from the Joanna Briggs Institute. RESULTS: Of 956 studies found, 39 were selected for full-text review. Moreover, 10 studies (n=4767 women) were eligible and included in the meta-analysis. All 10 studies were conducted in high-income countries (Denmark [n=1], the United Kingdom [n=3], and the United States [n=6]). The incidences of wound infection (n=4593 women) and wound dehiscence (n=3866 women) after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair ranged between 0.1% to 19.8% and 1.9% to 24.6%, respectively. The overall incidences were 4.4% (95% confidence interval, 0.4-8.4) for wound infection and 6.9% (95% confidence interval, 1.6-12.2) for wound dehiscence. The prediction intervals were wide and suggested that the true incidences of wound infection and dehiscence in future studies could lie between 0.0% to 11.7% and 0.0% to 16.4%, respectively. Overall, 8 studies had a high or unclear risk of bias across ≥1 assessed element. None of the studies used the same set of clinical parameters to define wound infection or dehiscence. Furthermore, microbiological confirmation with wound swabs was never used as a diagnostic measure. CONCLUSION: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of wound infection and dehiscence incidences after primary obstetric anal sphincter injury repair. The incidence estimates from this review will be useful for clinicians when counseling women with obstetric anal sphincter injury and when consenting them for primary surgical repair.

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.

Is there a role for transperineal ultrasound imaging of the anal sphincter immediately after primary repair of third degree tears?

OBJECTIVE: When obstetric anal sphincter injuries are identified, it is crucial that the defects are repaired appropriately to achieve a better outcome. Although the presence of an intact anal sphincter is not the sole mechanism for maintaining continence, and not all women with an anal sphincter defect are symptomatic, there is an association between sphincter defects and anal incontinence. Our aim was to evaluate whether transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) is useful in assessing anal sphincter integrity immediately following primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs). STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective observational study of women who sustained OASIs during their first vaginal delivery. Three dimensional (3D) TPUS was performed immediately after repair of OASIs to identify anal sphincter defects. A repeat TPUS was performed 12 weeks following repair. RESULTS: 21 women sustained OASIs of whom 20 (95%) attended follow up. Eight (40%) had a grade 3a tear and 12 (60%) a 3b tear. 8/20 (40%) women had residual external anal sphincter (EAS) defects identified by TPUS immediately after repair. Of these eight defects, six (75%) persisted at 12 weeks postpartum. No new defects were seen at follow up among the twelve women in whom no defect was seen immediately following the repair. Six residual EAS defects were found at 12 weeks postpartum. An EAS defect at 12 weeks postpartum was associated with anal incontinence (p = 0.04). Women with 3b tears were more likely to have anal incontinence (AI) and residual sonographic EAS defects when compared with 3a tears but this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Women who had no TPUS defect detected immediately following primary repair of OASIs, remained as such at 12 weeks postpartum. Of those in whom a defect was seen immediately after repair, it persisted in 75% of cases at 12 weeks. We believe that the value of TPUS immediately after repair appears to be limited and would need to be defined if it were to be considered for routine practice. Further research on its role immediately after repair of major tears (Grade 3C/4) is needed. In addition, performing ultrasound would require widespread training of obstetricians to develop expertise. This highlights the importance of adequate training of obstetricians in OASI repair.

Under-classified obstetric anal sphincter injuries.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOSTHESIS: Obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) that are missed at delivery can have long-term consequences. OASIs that are under-classified at delivery are likely to be inadequately repaired, resulting in a persistent anal sphincter defect. We aimed to identify women who have persistent defects on endoanal ultrasound, inconsistent with the original diagnosis, and compare the effect on St Mark's incontinence scores (SMIS). We also aimed to look for changes in numbers of under-classification over time. METHODS: Records of women attending a perineal clinic who had endoanal ultrasound from 2012 to 2020 were reviewed. Women who had a modified Starck score implying a defect greater than the classification [indicated by the depth of external anal sphincter or internal anal sphincter (IAS) defect] at delivery were identified. RESULTS: A total of 1056 women with a diagnosis of 3a or 3b tears were included. Of these, 120 (11.36%) were found to have a defect greater than the original diagnosis and therefore were incorrectly classified at delivery. Women who had a 3b tear diagnosed at delivery, but had an IAS defect, had a significantly higher SMIS (p < 0.01). When comparing two 4-year periods, there was a significant improvement in the diagnosis of IAS tears. CONCLUSION: Some women with OASIs that have under-classified OASIs are associated with worse anorectal symptoms. This is likely because of an incomplete repair. Some improvement in diagnosis of IAS tears has been noted. We propose improved training in OASIs can help reduce the number of incorrectly classified tears and improve repair.

Healing of disrupted perineal wounds after vaginal delivery: a poorly understood condition.

Perineal injury following childbirth can result in complications such as wound infection and dehiscence. The reported incidence of these complications in the literature range between 0.1-23.6% and 0.2-24.6%, respectively. However, the healing of disrupted perineal wounds is poorly understood. In addition, it is a neglected area in maternity services. In this review, the authors explore the process of wound healing in the context of infected perineal wounds following childbirth. In addition, the authors describe the management of complications including hypergranulation, perineal pain and dyspareunia.

Imaging modalities for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with obstructed defaecation syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Obstructed defaecation syndrome (ODS) is difficulty in evacuating stools, requiring straining efforts at defaecation, having the sensation of incomplete evacuation, or the need to manually assist defaecation. This is due to a physical blockage of the faecal stream during defaecation attempts, caused by rectocele, enterocele, intussusception, anismus or pelvic floor descent. Evacuation proctography (EP) is the most common imaging technique for diagnosis of posterior pelvic floor disorders. It has been regarded as the reference standard because of extensive experience, although it has been proven not to have perfect accuracy. Moreover, EP is invasive, embarrassing and uses ionising radiation. Alternative imaging techniques addressing these issues have been developed and assessed for their accuracy. Because of varying results, leading to a lack of consensus, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature are required. OBJECTIVES: To determine the diagnostic test accuracy of EP, dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and pelvic floor ultrasound for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with ODS, using latent class analysis in the absence of a reference standard, and to assess whether MRI or ultrasound could replace EP. The secondary objective was to investigate differences in diagnostic test accuracy in relation to the use of rectal contrast, evacuation phase, patient position and cut-off values, which could influence test outcome. SEARCH METHODS: We ran an electronic search on 18 December 2019 in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, SCI, CINAHL and CPCI. Reference list, Google scholar. We also searched WHO ICTRP and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible articles. Two review authors conducted title and abstract screening and full-text assessment, resolving disagreements with a third review author. SELECTION CRITERIA: Diagnostic test accuracy and cohort studies were eligible for inclusion if they evaluated the test accuracy of EP, and MRI or pelvic floor ultrasound, or both, for the detection of posterior pelvic floor disorders in women with ODS. We excluded case-control studies. If studies partially met the inclusion criteria, we contacted the authors for additional information. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors performed data extraction, including study characteristics, 'Risk-of-bias' assessment, sources of heterogeneity and test accuracy results. We excluded studies if test accuracy data could not be retrieved despite all efforts. We performed meta-analysis using Bayesian hierarchical latent class analysis. For the index test to qualify as a replacement test for EP, both sensitivity and specificity should be similar or higher than the historic reference standard (EP), and for a triage test either specificity or sensitivity should be similar or higher. We conducted heterogeneity analysis assessing the effect of different test conditions on test accuracy. We ran sensitivity analyses by excluding studies with high risk of bias, with concerns about applicability, or those published before 2010. We assessed the overall quality of evidence (QoE) according to GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies covering 2483 participants were included into the meta-analyses. We produced pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for all index tests for each target condition. Findings of the sensitivity analyses were consistent with the main analysis. Sensitivity of EP for diagnosis of rectocele was 98% (credible interval (CrI)94%-99%), enterocele 91%(CrI 83%-97%), intussusception 89%(CrI 79%-96%) and pelvic floor descent 98%(CrI 93%-100%); specificity for enterocele was 96%(CrI 93%-99%), intussusception 92%(CrI 86%-97%) and anismus 97%(CrI 94%-99%), all with high QoE. Moderate to low QoE showed a sensitivity for anismus of 80%(CrI 63%-94%), and specificity for rectocele of 78%(CrI 63%-90%) and pelvic floor descent 83%(CrI 59%-96%). Specificity of MRI for diagnosis of rectocele was 90% (CrI 79%-97%), enterocele 99% (CrI 96%-100%) and intussusception 97% (CrI 88%-100%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with high QoE. MRI did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Heterogeneity analysis showed that sensitivity of MRI performed with evacuation phase was higher than without for rectocele (94%, CrI 87%-98%) versus 65%, CrI 52% to 89%, and enterocele (87%, CrI 74%-95% versus 62%, CrI 51%-88%), and sensitivity of MRI without evacuation phase was significantly lower than EP. Specificity of transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) for diagnosis of rectocele was 89% (CrI 81%-96%), enterocele 98% (CrI 95%-100%) and intussusception 96% (CrI 91%-99%); sensitivity for anismus was 92% (CrI 72%-98%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with high QoE. TPUS did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Heterogeneity analysis showed that sensitivity of TPUS performed with rectal contrast was not significantly higher than without for rectocele(92%, CrI 69%-99% versus 81%, CrI 58%-95%), enterocele (90%, CrI 71%-99% versus 67%, CrI 51%-90%) and intussusception (90%, CrI 69%-98% versus 61%, CrI 51%-86%), and was lower than EP. Specificity of endovaginal ultrasound (EVUS) for diagnosis of rectocele was 76% (CrI 54%-93%), enterocele 97% (CrI 80%-99%) and intussusception 93% (CrI 72%-99%); sensitivity for anismus was 84% (CrI 59%-96%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with very low to moderate QoE. EVUS did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Specificity of dynamic anal endosonography (DAE) for diagnosis of rectocele was 88% (CrI 62%-99%), enterocele 97% (CrI 75%-100%) and intussusception 93% (CrI 65%-99%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with very low to moderate QoE. DAE did not meet the criteria to replace EP. Echodefaecography (EDF) had a sensitivity of 89% (CrI 65%-98%) and specificity of 92% (CrI 72%-99%) for intussusception, meeting the criteria to replace EP but with very low QoE. Specificity of EDF for diagnosis of rectocele was 89% (CrI 60%-99%) and for enterocele 97% (CrI 87%-100%); sensitivity for anismus was 87% (CrI 72%-96%), meeting the criteria for a triage test with low to very low QoE. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In a population of women with symptoms of ODS, none of the imaging techniques met the criteria to replace EP. MRI and TPUS met the criteria of a triage test, as a positive test confirms diagnosis of rectocele, enterocele and intussusception, and a negative test rules out diagnosis of anismus. An evacuation phase increased sensitivity of MRI. Rectal contrast did not increase sensitivity of TPUS. QoE of EVUS, DAE and EDF was too low to draw conclusions. More well-designed studies are required to define their role in the diagnostic pathway of ODS.

Early secondary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs): experience and a review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Secondary anal sphincter repair for a dehisced obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) is required following 2.6% of primary repairs. There is growing evidence that instead of delaying repair for 3-6 months, early secondary repair of the anal sphincter can be completed within 14 days. Our aims were to review the literature and to describe experiences in our unit. METHODS: This is a narrative review of all published cases reporting outcomes of early secondary repair of dehisced OASIs. In addition, we report a series from Croydon University Hospital (CUH) between 2010 and 2019. RESULTS: Ninety patients from five studies were identified on literature search. Six patients from CUH were included in the case series. Overall, the most common complications following secondary repair included skin dehiscence [10.3% (n = 10)], infection [5.2% (n = 5)] and fistula formation [8.2% (n = 8)]. In our case series, following secondary repair, normal manometric incremental squeeze pressure was found in five women (83%). Also, on endoanal ultrasound, internal anal sphincter (IAS) defects were found in 75% with a history of IAS injury (n = 4). There were no full-thickness external anal sphincter defects. Compared to those requiring primary repair alone, residual defects were significantly larger in those who also underwent secondary repair (Starck score 2.1 vs. 5.7, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Early secondary repair is a feasible surgical procedure for the reconstruction of dehisced OASIs. This case series and review of the literature can be used to support clinicians in the management of primary OASI repair dehiscence.

Anal and urinary incontinence in nulliparous women - Prevalence and associated risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the prevalence and risk factors of urinary and anal incontinence in nulliparous women. STUDY DESIGN: Thirty-one catholic convents were sent a validated questionnaire to determine the prevalence and severity of urinary incontinence, and a similarly structured questionnaire to assess anal incontinence. Multivariable regression models were used to determine independent risk factors associated with the likelihood of urinary incontinence or anal incontinence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Urine/faecal/flatal incontinence and symptom severity. RESULTS: Of 202 nuns, 167 (83%) returned the questionnaire. Twenty-two women were excluded due to history of childbirth. Of 145 nulliparous women, 56.2% reported urinary incontinence and 53.8% reported anal incontinence. Women aged 66-76 years had significantly increased odds of experiencing urinary incontinence in comparison to women aged 40-65 years: OR: 2.35 (95% CI: 1.02-5.45) (p = 0.04). The risk of urinary incontinence was increased in women with a body mass index ≥ 30 in comparison to those with a body mass index < 19: OR: 6.25 (95% CI: 1.03-38.08) (p = 0.04). With regards to anal incontinence, although none of the differences with age and body mass index groups reached statistical significance, there was a trend towards women in higher body mass index groups having an increased prevalence of anal incontinence. Current/previous hormonal replacement therapy was also associated with significantly increased odds of experiencing urinary incontinence: OR: 2.53 (95% CI: 1.01-6.36), (p = 0.04). However, when adjusting for age and body mass index, there was no significant association with urinary incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that while childbirth is an important risk factor, urinary incontinence and anal incontinence also occur in over 50% of nulliparous women. Additional studies are required to identify other risk factors that may be associated with incontinence in this population.