Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28721483›Full record

ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2018

The effectiveness of mediolateral episiotomy in preventing obstetric anal sphincter injuries during operative vaginal delivery: a ten-year analysis of a national registry.

Jeroen van Bavel, Chantal W P M Hukkelhoven, Charlotte de Vries, Dimitri N M Papatsonis, Joey de Vogel, Jan-Paul W R Roovers, Ben Willem Mol, Jan Willem de Leeuw

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urogynecology journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries according to the type of forceps used in the Mexican population.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Observational
  19. Berlin survey on obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI).Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Jeroen van BavelDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amphia Hospital Breda, Langendijk 75, 4819 EV, Breda, The Netherlands. JvanBavel@amphia.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-0915-989X
Chantal W P M HukkelhovenThe Netherlands Perinatal Registry, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Charlotte de VriesThe Netherlands Perinatal Registry, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Dimitri N M PapatsonisDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Amphia Hospital Breda, Langendijk 75, 4819 EV, Breda, The Netherlands.
Joey de VogelDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jan-Paul W R RooversDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ben Willem MolThe Robinson Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Jan Willem de LeeuwDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ikazia Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Amphia Ziekenhuis · NLNetherlands Heart Registration · NLAmsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NLErasmus MC · NLIkazia Ziekenhuis · NLSouth Australian Health and Medical Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisObstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) are associated with an increased risk of faecal incontinence after vaginal delivery. The aim of this retrospective population-based cohort study was to assess whether mediolateral episiotomy is associated with a reduction in the rate of OASIS during operative vaginal delivery.

methodsWe used data from the Dutch Perinatal Registry (Perined) that includes records of almost all births between 2000 and 2010 in The Netherlands. In a cohort of 170,969 primiparous and multiparous women whose delivery was recorded, we estimated the association between mediolateral episiotomy and OASIS following both vacuum and forceps deliveries using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

resultsThe incidences of OASIS following vacuum delivery in 130,157 primiparous women were 2.5% and 14% in those with and without a mediolateral episiotomy, respectively (adjusted OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.13-0.15), and in 29,183 multiparous women were 2.0% and 7.5%, respectively (adjusted OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.21-0.27). The incidences of OASIS following forceps delivery in 9,855 primiparous women were 3.4% and 26.7% in those with and without a mediolateral episiotomy, respectively (adjusted OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.07-0.11), and in 1,774 multiparous women were 2.6% and 14.2%, respectively (adjusted OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.08-0.22).

conclusionsThe use of a mediolateral episiotomy during both vacuum delivery and forceps delivery is associated with a fivefold to tenfold reduction in the rate of OASIS in primiparous and multiparous women.

Indexed as

AdultAnal CanalCase-Control StudiesClinical ProtocolsEpisiotomyFemaleHumansLacerationsNetherlandsObstetrical ForcepsObstetric Labor ComplicationsParityPregnancyRegistriesRetrospective StudiesStatistics, NonparametricEpisiotomyObstetric anal sphincter injuryOperative vaginal delivery

Identifiers

PMID28721483
OpenAlexW2738198862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.