Comparison of use of restrictive episiotomy versus routine episiotomy in primigravidae undergoing vaginal birth at a tertiary care hospital

Deshwal Venus; Rao P. S.; S. Prajwal

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20171501

Authors

Deshwal Venus Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Army Hospital RR, New Delhi, India
Rao P. S. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Command Hospital AF, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
S. Prajwal Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Command Hospital AF, Bangalore, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20171501

Keywords:

Episiotomy, Primigravida, Vaginal delivery

Abstract

Background: Episiotomy is the surgical enlargement of the vaginal orifice by an incision on the perineum during the last part of the second stage of labour or delivery. Episiotomy, incision of the perineum at the time of vaginal childbirth, is a common surgical procedure experienced by women. This study is done to compare use of restrictive episiotomy and routine episiotomy in primigravidae undergoing vaginal birth.

Methods: This is a prospective cohort study designed to analyse the outcome of the restrictive use of episiotomy in comparison to routine use of episiotomy. Total 100 primigravidae women reporting to labour room in spontaneous labour/induction of labour were included and two cohorts were formed. Both the cohorts were evaluated during labour, immediate postpartum period and first postnatal day and data was tabulated and analysed.

Results: Vaginal and paraurethral tears were noted in 14% primigravidae in the routine episiotomy group and 22.22% in the restrictive episiotomy group with no statistically significant association. Number of cases sustaining perineal tear in restrictive group was 15.55% and extension of episiotomy in the routine group was 26% with no statistically significant association. Requirement of suturing was far less in restrictive group (20%) as compared to routine group (100%), as 64.45% of the patients in restrictive group delivered with an intact perineum. The restrictive use of episiotomy does not prolong the second stage of labour and has requirement of significantly less pain relief compared to the routine group. Complication rate was higher in the routine group and perineal laceration and pain severity, was less in restrictive episiotomy group. However, neonatal complications were similar in the two groups.

Conclusions: This study identified fair to good evidence suggesting that immediate outcomes following routine use of episiotomy are no better than those of restrictive use. Indeed, routine use is harmful to the degree that some proportion of women who would have had lesser injury instead had a surgical incision.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Weber AM, Meyn L. Episiotomy use in the United States, 1979-1997. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100(6):1177-82.

Ould F. A treatise of midwifery. London: J Buckland. 1741:145-6.

Thacker SB, Banta HD. Benefits and risks of episiotomy: An interpretive review of the English language literature, 1860–1980. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1983;38(6):322-38.

Langer B, Minetti A. Immediate and long term complications of episiotomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2006;35(1):32-9.

Hartmann K, Viswanathan M. Outcomes of routine episiotomy: A systematic review, JAMA. 2005;293(17):2141-8.

Popovic JR. National Hospital Discharge Survey: Annual summary with detailed diagnosis and procedure data. Vital Health Stat 13. 2001;151:1-206.

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ. Births: Final data for 2000. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2002;50(5):1-101.

Bhatia JC and Cleland J. Determinants of maternal care in a region of South India, Health Transition Review. 1995:127-42.

Nugent F. The primiparous perineum after forceps delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1935;30:249.

Murphy D, 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):1695-702.

Shahraki AD, Aram S, Pourkabirian S, Khodaee S, Choupannejad S. A comparison between early maternal and neonatal complications of restrictive episiotomy and routine episiotomy in primiparous vaginal delivery. J Res Med Sci. 2011;16(12):1583-9.

Saxena RK, Sandhu GS, Babu KM, Bando H, Sharma GV. Restricted use of episiotomy; J Obstet Gynecol India. 2010;60(5):408-12.

Carroli G, Mignini L. Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(1):81.

Clemons JL, Towers GD. Decreased anal sphincter lacerations associated with restrictive episiotomy use. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(5):1620-5.

Eltorkey MM, Nuaim MA. Episiotomy, elective or selective: A report of a random allocation trial. J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994;14(5):317-20.

Argentine Episiotomy Trial Collaborative Group. Routine vs selective episiotomy: a randomised controlled trial. 1993;342(8886-8887):1517-18.

Adoni A, Anteby E. Episiotomy practice: changes and evidence-based medicine in action: the building controversy: episiotomy and severe perineal lacerations. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1991;98(5):476-8.

Malik J, Das S, Das A, Rai P. Judicial use of episiotomy in singleton normal vaginal deliveries at term: the changing trend. IJRCOG. 2016;5(3):882-5.