Selective Episiotomy: Indications, Techinique, and Association with Severe Perineal Lacerations

Abstract

Introduction Episiotomy is a controversial procedure, especially because the discussion that surrounds it has gone beyond the field of scientific debate, being adopted as an indicator of the “humanization of childbirth”. The scientific literature indicates that episiotomy should not be performed routinely, but selectively.

Objectives To review the literature in order to assess whether the implementation of selective episiotomy protects against severe perineal lacerations, the indications for the procedure, and the best technique to perform it.

Methods A literature search was performed in PubMed using the terms episiotomy or perineal lacerations, and the filter clinical trial. The articles concerning the risk of severe perineal lacerations with or without episiotomy, perineal protection, or episiotomy techniques were selected.

Results A total of 141 articles were identified, and 24 of them were included in the review. Out of the 13 studies that evaluated the risk of severe lacerations with and without episiotomy, 5 demonstrated a protective role of selective episiotomy, and 4 showed no significant differences between the groups. Three small studies confirmed the finding that episiotomy should be performed selectively and not routinely, and one study showed that midline episiotomy increased the risk of severe lacerations. The most cited indications were primiparity, fetal weight greater than 4 kg, prolonged second stage, operative delivery, and shoulder dystocia. As for the surgical technique, episiotomies performed with wider angles (> 40°) and earlier in the second stage (before “crowning “) appeared to be more protective.

Conclusions Selective episiotomy decreases the risk of severe lacerations when compared with the non-performance or the performance of routine episiotomy. The use of a proper surgical technique is fundamental to obtain better results, especially in relation to the angle of incision, the distance from the vaginal introitus, and the correct timing for performing the procedure. Not performing the episiotomy when indicated or not applying the correct technique may increase the risk of severe perineal lacerations.

Resumo

Introdução A episiotomia é um procedimento controverso, devido, em parte, à discussão sobre sua realização ter ultrapassado o campo do debate cientifico, sendo adotada como indicador associado com a “humanização do parto.” A literatura mostra que a episiotomia não deve ser realizada rotineiramente, mas de forma seletiva. Questões relativas à sua indicação, técnica de realização e associação com lacerações perineais graves são objeto de amplo debate e pesquisa.

Objetivos Revisar a literatura para avaliar se a realização da episiotomia seletiva protege contra lacerações perineais graves, quais são suas indicações, e qual a melhor técnica para realizar este procedimento.

Método Foi realizada busca no PubMed com os termos episiotomy ou perineal lacerations utilizando o filtro clinical trial. Foram selecionados os artigos que tratavam do risco de lacerações perineais graves com e sem episiotomia, ou de técnicas de proteção perineal ou de episiotomia.

Resultados Foram identificados 141 artigos, dos quais 24 foram incluídos na revisão. Dos 13 estudos que avaliaram o risco de lacerações graves com e sem episiotomia, 5 demonstraram o papel protetor da episiotomia seletiva, e 4 não mostraram diferenças significativas entre os grupos. Três pequenos estudos confirmaram o achado de que a episiotomia deve ser realizada seletiva e não rotineiramente, e um estudo mostrou que a episiotomia mediana aumenta o risco de lacerações graves. Quanto às indicações, as mais citadas foram a primiparidade, peso fetal maior do que 4kg, período expulsivo prolongado, parto operatório e distocia de ombro. Quanto à técnica, episiotomias realizadas com ângulos mais abertos (> 40°) e mais precocemente no período expulsivo (antes do “coroamento”) parecem ser mais protetoras.

Conclusões Episiotomias seletivas reduzem o risco de lacerações graves comparativamente à não realização de episiotomia ou à realização de episiotomia rotineira. Para esse resultado, é fundamental a utilização de técnica operatória correta, principalmente em relação ao ângulo de inclinação e distância da fúrcula vaginal, além do momento de sua realização. Deixar de realizar a episiotomia, com a técnica correta e quando bem indicada, pode aumentar o risco de lacerações perineais graves.

Keywords

episiotomy - perineal lacerations - obstetrical delivery

Palavras-chave

episiotomia - lacerações perineais - parto obstétrico

• References

• 1 Thacker SB, Banta HD. Benefits and risks of episiotomy: an interpretative review of the English language literature, 1860-1980. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1983; 38 (6) 322-338
• 2 DeLee JB. The prophylactic forceps operation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1920; 1 (1) 34-44
• 3 Carroli G, Mignini L. Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (1) CD000081
• 4 Goldberg J, Holtz D, Hyslop T, Tolosa JE. Has the use of routine episiotomy decreased? Examination of episiotomy rates from 1983 to 2000. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 99 (3) 395-400
• 5 Gurol-Urganci I, Cromwell DA, Edozien LC , et al. Third- and fourth-degree perineal tears among primiparous women in England between 2000 and 2012: time trends and risk factors. BJOG 2013; 120 (12) 1516-1525
• 6 Räisänen S, Cartwright R, Gissler M , et al. Changing associations of episiotomy and anal sphincter injury across risk strata: results of a population-based register study in Finland 2004-2011. BMJ Open 2013; 3 (8) 1-8
• 7 Bradley CS, Richter HE, Gutman RE , et al; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Risk factors for sonographic internal anal sphincter gaps 6-12 months after delivery complicated by anal sphincter tear. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197 (3) 310.e1-310.e5
• 8 Revicky V, Nirmal D, Mukhopadhyay S, Morris EP, Nieto JJ. Could a mediolateral episiotomy prevent obstetric anal sphincter injury?. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010; 150 (2) 142-146
• 9 Landy HJ, Laughon SK, Bailit JL , et al; Consortium on Safe Labor. Characteristics associated with severe perineal and cervical lacerations during vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117 (3) 627-635
• 10 Aukee P, Sundström H, Kairaluoma MV. The role of mediolateral episiotomy during labour: analysis of risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter tears. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006; 85 (7) 856-860
• 11 Moini A, Yari RE, Eslami B. Episiotomy and third- and fourth-degree perineal tears in primiparous Iranian women. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009; 104 (3) 241-242
• 12 Eskandar O, Shet D. Risk factors for 3rd and 4th degree perineal tear. J Obstet Gynaecol 2009; 29 (2) 119-122
• 13 Stedenfeldt M, Øian P, Gissler M, Blix E, Pirhonen J. Risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injury after a successful multicentre interventional programme. BJOG 2014; 121 (1) 83-91
• 14 Gottvall K, Allebeck P, Ekéus C. Risk factors for anal sphincter tears: the importance of maternal position at birth. BJOG 2007; 114 (10) 1266-1272
• 15 Dahlen HG, Ryan M, Homer CS, Cooke M. An Australian prospective cohort study of risk factors for severe perineal trauma during childbirth. Midwifery 2007; 23 (2) 196-203
• 16 Räisänen S, Selander T, Cartwright R , et al. The association of episiotomy with obstetric anal sphincter injury—a population based matched cohort study. PLoS ONE 2014; 9 (9) 1-7
• 17 Jangö H, Langhoff-Roos J, Rosthøj S, Sakse A. Modifiable risk factors of obstetric anal sphincter injury in primiparous women: a population-based cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210 (1) 59.e1-59.e6
• 18 Jangö H, Langhoff-Roos J, Rosthøj S, Sakse A. Risk factors of recurrent anal sphincter ruptures: a population-based cohort study. BJOG 2012; 119 (13) 1640-1647
• 19 Fritel X, Schaal JP, Fauconnier A, Bertrand V, Levet C, Pigné A. Pelvic floor disorders 4 years after first delivery: a comparative study of restrictive versus systematic episiotomy. BJOG 2008; 115 (2) 247-252
• 20 Murphy DJ, Macleod M, Bahl R, Goyder K, Howarth L, Strachan B. A randomised controlled trial of routine versus restrictive use of episiotomy at operative vaginal delivery: a multicentre pilot study. BJOG 2008; 115 (13) 1695-1702 , discussion 1702–1703
• 21 Macleod M, Strachan B, Bahl R , et al. A prospective cohort study of maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to use of episiotomy at operative vaginal delivery. BJOG 2008; 115 (13) 1688-1694
• 22 de Leeuw JW, de Wit C, Kuijken JP, Bruinse HW. Mediolateral episiotomy reduces the risk for anal sphincter injury during operative vaginal delivery. BJOG 2008; 115 (1) 104-108
• 23 Islam A, Hanif A, Ehsan A, Arif S, Niazi SK, Niazi AK. Morbidity from episiotomy. J Pak Med Assoc 2013; 63 (6) 696-701
• 24 Sulaiman AS, Ahmad S, Ismail NA, Rahman RA, Jamil MA, Mohd Dali AZ. A randomized control trial evaluating the prevalence of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries in primigravida in routine versus selective mediolateral episiotomy. Saudi Med J 2013; 34 (8) 819-823
• 25 Hauck YL, Lewis L, Nathan EA, White C, Doherty DA. Risk factors for severe perineal trauma during vaginal childbirth: a Western Australian retrospective cohort study. Women Birth 2015; 28 (1) 16-20
• 26 Andrews V, Thakar R, Sultan AH, Jones PW. Are mediolateral episiotomies actually mediolateral?. BJOG 2005; 112 (8) 1156-1158
• 27 Eogan M, Daly L, O'Connell PR, O'Herlihy C. Does the angle of episiotomy affect the incidence of anal sphincter injury?. BJOG 2006; 113 (2) 190-194
• 28 Kalis V, Karbanova J, Horak M, Lobovsky L, Kralickova M, Rokyta Z. The incision angle of mediolateral episiotomy before delivery and after repair. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2008; 103 (1) 5-8
• 29 Stedenfeldt M, Pirhonen J, Blix E, Wilsgaard T, Vonen B, Øian P. Episiotomy characteristics and risks for obstetric anal sphincter injuries: a case-control study. BJOG 2012; 119 (6) 724-730
• 30 Gonzalez-Díaz E, Moreno Cea L, Fernández Corona A. Trigonometric characteristics of episiotomy and risks for obstetric anal sphincter injuries in operative vaginal delivery. Int Urogynecol J 2015; 26 (2) 235-242
• 31 Parente MP, Natal Jorge RM, Mascarenhas T, Silva-Filho AL. The influence of pelvic muscle activation during vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 115 (4) 804-808
• 32 Muniz BMV, Barbosa RM. Problematizando o atendimento ao parto: cuidado ou violência?. Actas de Memorias Convención Internacional de Salud Pública; 2012 dic 3–7; La Habana, Cuba. p. 1–11.
• 33 de Leeuw JW, Struijk PC, Vierhout ME, Wallenburg HCS. Risk factors for third degree perineal ruptures during delivery. BJOG 2001; 108 (4) 383-387
• 34 McLennan MT, Melick CF, Clancy SL, Artal R. Episiotomy and perineal repair. An evaluation of resident education and experience. J Reprod Med 2002; 47 (12) 1025-1030
• 35 Shiono P, Klebanoff MA, Carey JC. Midline episiotomies: more harm than good?. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 75 (5) 765-770
• 36 Corrêa MD, Corrêa Junior MD. Assistência ao parto. In: Corrêa MD, Melo VH, Aguiar RALP, Corrêa Junior MD, , editores. Noções práticas de obstetrícia. 14a ed. Belo Horizonte: Coopmed; 2011. . p. 867–94.
• 37 Woolley RJ. Benefits and risks of episiotomy: a review of the English-language literature since 1980. Part I. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1995; 50 (11) 806-820