ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Mediolateral episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injuries in nullipara: a propensity score matching study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Episiotomy is associated with a reduced risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury in nulliparous vacuum-assisted deliveries, particularly in high-risk cases.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Effects of hand preference on learning episiotomy skills: a study conducted with midwifery students.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- The effect of a pelvic floor training program on perineal trauma during birth: a patient-preference controlled clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Episiotomy and Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury Among Unassisted Vaginal Births: A Retrospective Cohort Study.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026Article
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
backgroundObstetric anal sphincter injuries are a notable adverse outcome of vaginal deliveries, with incidence rates ranging from 0.25% to 6%. Key risk factors for these injuries include primiparity and operative vaginal deliveries. In recent decades, the use of episiotomy as a preventive measure for obstetric anal sphincter injuries has been subject to extensive scrutiny. The objective of this study was to investigate the role of mediolateral episiotomy in preventing obstetric anal sphincter injuries during vaginal deliveries or vacuum-assisted deliveries within the context of selective use.
methodsRetrospective study of all nulliparous women with a singleton gestation who underwent term vaginal delivery or vacuum-assisted delivery. A propensity score matching with a 1:1 ratio was employed to adjust for confounders. Primary outcome was obstetric anal sphincter injury rate, and the secondary outcome was a composite neonatal outcome (umbilical artery pH < 7.1, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and 5-min Apgar score < 7).
resultsThe study cohort comprised 22,738 deliveries: 77.0% vaginal deliveries (17,518/22,738) and 23.0% vacuum-assisted deliveries (5,220/22,738) with episiotomy rates of 38.5% (6,751/17,518) and 75.8% (3,959/5,220), respectively. Separate analyses were conducted for the matched vaginal delivery group (n = 13,500) and the matched vacuum-assisted delivery group (n = 2,518). No significant differences in obstetric anal sphincter injury rates were observed in the vaginal delivery (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.78-1.69) or vacuum-assisted delivery (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.31-1.05) groups. However, in the vacuum-assisted delivery group, episiotomy demonstrated a borderline protective effect against obstetric anal sphincter injuries. Further adjustment for the duration of the second stage of labor duration in vacuum-assisted deliveries revealed a significant protective effect of episiotomy against obstetric anal sphincter injuries, with a number needed to treat of 28 (95% CI 15-224) in cases of prolonged second stages of labor. Episiotomy in vaginal deliveries was associated with a higher rate of composite neonatal outcome (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.45), while vacuum-assisted deliveries showed no such association (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86-1.44).
conclusionsIn context of selective use, mediolateral episiotomy has no significant protective effect on obstetric anal sphincter injuries in women undergoing vaginal delivery. However, there is a possible benefit in vacuum-assisted delivery, especially when considering the duration of the second stage of labor.
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.