Vacuum Extraction Versus Forceps Delivery: Indications and Complications, 1979 to 1984

Two hundred fifty-six vacuum extractions and 300 randomly chosen forceps deliveries were analyzed retrospectively. Vacuum extraction use increased from 0.3 to 3.1%, while forceps use declined from 10.1 to 4.9% over a five-year period. No differences were found in indications for vacuum extraction and forceps, but the preapplication position differed (occiput posterior or transverse in 81.2% in the vacuum group and 27% in forceps patients). Preapplication station also differed, with 59.8% of vacuum extraction at +1 or higher stations, compared with 9% of forceps. Under these conditions we found less maternal trauma, similar failure rates (3.9 versus 2%), and no difference in maternal morbidity. There was a higher incidence of shoulder dystocia and neonatal jaundice in the vacuum group, but cephalohematoma frequency did not differ significantly (3.9% vacuum extraction, 4.3% forceps). Cosmetic injuries (ecchymoses, abrasions) were more likely with vacuum extraction than with forceps (44.1 versus 29.5%). One death occurred in each group. Vacuum extraction replaced midforceps in our institution in the study period. We consider vacuum extraction a useful technique to teach house staff in view of todayʼs decreasing instrumental delivery rate.