Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40162569›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2025

The effect of antenatal vaginal dilators on perineal trauma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Samantha G Zambuto, Adrienne K Scott, Angela Hardi, Michelle L Oyen, Siobhan Sutcliffe, Jerry L Lowder

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Samantha G ZambutoDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2674-9541
Adrienne K ScottDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Angela HardiBernard Becker Library, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Michelle L OyenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Siobhan SutcliffeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Jerry L LowderDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.

Funding

Clinical Outcomes Research Training in Female Lower Urinary Tract DisordersT32DK120497 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI LOWDER, JERRY LANE, SUTCLIFFE, SIOBHAN · 2020 to 2024
$879k
NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK120497NIH HHS T32DK120497
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVaginal dilators use inflatable balloons that can be gently increased in size to dilate the vagina at a controlled rate before or during delivery.

objectiveThe primary objective of this study was to assess if antenatal use of vaginal dilator devices reduces the incidence of the following outcomes: episiotomy, perineal lacerations, anal sphincter injury, and levator ani avulsion. SEARCH STRATEGY: We identified studies using Embase, Ovid-Medline All, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to August 28, 2024. We searched for concepts of vaginal dilators or birth training devices, episiotomy, and injuries to the vagina, perineum, pelvic floor musculature, or obstetric anal sphincter. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and non-randomized studies that reported outcomes of interest in participants who used any vaginal dilator device during pregnancy/delivery compared to those who did not. Inclusion criteria were: (1) original clinical research, (2) use of any vaginal dilator device during pregnancy compared to a non-dilator control group and (3) provision of data on at least one of the four outcomes. Exclusion criteria were: (1) publications in languages other than English and French, (2) not peer-reviewed original research and (3) studies that combined dilator use with a second intervention. For meta-analyses, studies were included in each subgroup if they included relevant data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent readers screened studies for inclusion/exclusion criteria and independently performed data extraction. Primary outcomes included episiotomies, perineal lacerations, anal sphincter injury, and levator ani avulsion. These outcomes were analyzed separately and combined. The Cochrane Q Test and Higgin's I MAIN

resultsOf 64 screened studies, six were included in the meta-analyses. Antenatal vaginal dilator device reduced incidence of episiotomy compared to no treatment in all studies combined (n = 1262; pooled risk ratio = 0.82 [95% CI: 0.69, 0.98]), but not higher-quality studies (n = 862; pooled risk ratio = 0.90 [95% CI: 0.73, 1.11]). No associations were observed for perineal lacerations, obstetric anal sphincter injury, and levator ani injury in all studies combined or in higher-quality studies. No association was also observed when all outcomes were combined.

conclusionsResults from our systematic review and meta-analysis do not support a protective effect of antenatal vaginal dilator device use on perineal trauma, especially when limited to the highest-quality studies. However, as our findings were based on the results of only two randomized controlled trials that included birth attendant blinding, additional rigorous studies including birth attendant and outcome assessor blinding are warranted to address this question conclusively.

Indexed as

Delivery, ObstetricDilatationObstetric Labor ComplicationsPerineumPrenatal CareVaginaAnal CanalEpisiotomyFemaleHumansLacerationsPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicchildbirth injurydeliveryobstetric anal sphincter injurypelvic floor injuryperineal lacerationpregnancyvaginal birth

Identifiers

PMID40162569
PMCPMC12256188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.