ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023
Incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries following breech compared to cephalic vaginal births.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of maternal and neonatal outcomes in cases of vaginal breech births versus cases of vaginal cephalic births: a retrospective cohort study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Effects of Perineal Warm Compresses during the Second Stage of Labor on Reducing Perineal Trauma and Relieving Postpartum Perineal Pain in Primiparous Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionObstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) at the time of childbirth can lead to serious consequences including anal incontinence, dyspareunia, pain and rectovaginal fistula. These types of lesions and their incidence have been well studied after cephalic presentation deliveries, but no publications have specifically addressed this issue in the context of vaginal breech delivery. The goal of our study was to evaluate the incidence of OASIs following breech deliveries and compare it with cephalic presentation births.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study involving 670 women. Of these, 224 and 446 had a vaginal birth of a fetus in the breech (breech group) and cephalic (cephalic group) presentations respectively. Both groups were matched for birthweight (± 200 g), date of delivery (± 2 years) and vaginal parity. Main outcome of interest was to evaluate the incidence of OASIs following breech vaginal birth compared to cephalic vaginal births. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of intact perineum or first-degree tear, second-degree perineal tear and rates of episiotomies in each group.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference in OASIs incidence between the breech and cephalic groups (0.9% vs. 1.1%; RR 0.802 (0.157; 4.101); p = 0.31). There were more episiotomies in the breech group (12.5% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.0012) and the rate of intact or first-degree perineum was similar in both groups (74.1% vs. 75.3%, p = 0.7291). A sub-analysis excluding patients with episiotomy and history of OASIs did not show any statistically significant difference either.
conclusionWe did not demonstrate a significant difference in the incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries between women who had a breech vaginal birth compared to cephalic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.