The effects of Mediolateral episiotomy on pelvic floor function after vaginal delivery

To evaluate the effect of mediolateral episiotomy on puerperal pelvic floor strength and dysfunction (urinary and anal incontinence, genital prolapse). Five hundred nineteen primiparous women were enrolled 3 months after vaginal delivery. Puerperae were divided in 2 groups: group A (254 women) compr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) 2004-04, Vol.103 (4), p.669-673
Hauptverfasser: SARTORE, Andrea, DE SETA, Francesco, MASO, Gianpaolo, PREGAZZI, Roberto, GRIMALDI, Eva, GUASCHINO, Secondo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To evaluate the effect of mediolateral episiotomy on puerperal pelvic floor strength and dysfunction (urinary and anal incontinence, genital prolapse). Five hundred nineteen primiparous women were enrolled 3 months after vaginal delivery. Puerperae were divided in 2 groups: group A (254 women) comprised the women who received mediolateral episiotomy and group B (265 women) the women with intact perineum and first- and second-degree spontaneous perineal lacerations. Each woman was questioned about urogynecological symptoms and examined by digital test, vaginal perineometry, and uroflowmetric stop test score. Data were subjected to Student t test and Fisher exact test to assess, respectively, the difference between the mean values and the proportions within the subpopulations. Using a simple logistic regression model to test an estimate of relative risk, we expressed the odds ratios of the variables considered with respect to the control population (group B). No significant difference was found with regard to the incidence of urinary and anal incontinence and genital prolapse, whereas dyspareunia and perineal pain were significantly higher in the episiotomy group (7.9% versus 3.4%, P =.026; 6.7% versus 2.3%, P =.014, respectively). Episiotomy was associated with significantly lower values, both in digital test (2.2 versus 2.6; P
ISSN:0029-7844
1873-233X
DOI:10.1097/01.aog.0000119223.04441.c9