Trial reportInternational urogynecology journal2024
Levator Ani Muscle Avulsion After Vaginal Delivery Comparing Routine Versus Restrictive Episiotomy: A Pilot Study.
Trial report in International urogynecology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThe objective was to compare the rate of levator ani muscle avulsion following vaginal birth after routine and restrictive episiotomy.
methodsThis study consists of two cohorts of pregnant women prospectively enrolled between September 2015 and December 2017 at a university hospital. The pregnant women were subject to a randomized controlled trial, in which participants received a restrictive episiotomy protocol versus a routine episiotomy protocol for vaginal delivery. Levator ani avulsion was evaluated by four-dimensional ultrasound screening.
resultsSixty-one post-partum primipara women were enrolled in our study. Thirty-two women (52.5%) had undergone routine episiotomy whereas 29 women (47.5%) had gone through restrictive episiotomy. Right mediolateral episiotomies were performed in all cases. The rate of anal sphincter tear was 12.5% in the routine episiotomy group versus 13.8% in the restrictive episiotomy group (p = 1.00). Levator ani avulsion was detected in 9.4% of the routine episiotomy group (only on the right side) and in 10.3% of the restrictive episiotomy group (p = 1.00). No bilateral levator avulsion was detected in either of the groups. There were no statistical differences in the distances of the bladder neck descent, cystocele descent, uterine descent, rectocele descent, and the ballooning of the genital hiatus area between the groups.
conclusionsIn our pilot study, there was no reduction of the rate of levator ani avulsion in women with restrictive episiotomy compared with routine episiotomy. There were no differences in pelvic floor ultrasound parameters between the two groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39105747What 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.