Observational studyScientific reports2026
Subpubic arch angle and occult obstetric anal spincter injury in primiparous women: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Occult obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASI) are frequently underdiagnosed after vaginal delivery and may contribute to long-term pelvic floor dysfunction. Maternal pelvic anatomy has been suggested to influence the risk of sphincter injury; however, the role of the subpubic arch angle remains insufficiently explored. This prospective observational study included 300 primiparous women aged 18–40 years who underwent vaginal delivery with mediolateral episiotomy. The subpubic arch angle was measured antenatally using transperineal ultrasonography. All participants underwent ultrasound evaluation of the anal sphincter before delivery to exclude pre-existing injuries. External anal sphincter integrity was reassessed 24 h postpartum to identify occult injuries. Associations between the subpubic arch angle, maternal and neonatal characteristics, and the presence of occult anal sphincter injury were analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to explore an exploratory threshold of the subpubic arch angle for descriptive and comparative purposes. Occult external anal sphincter injury was identified in 96 women (32.0%). Women with sphincter injury had a significantly narrower mean subpubic arch angle compared with those without injury (109.24 ± 11.29° vs. 112.79 ± 11.39°, p = 0.012). Maternal height was also significantly lower in women with sphincter injury (p < 0.05). No significant associations were observed between occult sphincter injury and fetal biometric parameters, labor induction, or the duration of the second stage of labor. ROC analysis demonstrated limited discriminative ability of the subpubic arch angle (AUC = 0.587; 95% CI 0.518–0.656). Using an exploratory threshold of 111.55°, occult sphincter injury was more frequent among women with narrower subpubic arch angles (p = 0.003). In this prospective cohort of primiparous women, occult obstetric anal sphincter injuries were more closely associated with maternal and pelvic anatomical factors than with fetal characteristics. A narrower subpubic arch angle was associated with an increased risk of occult sphincter injury, although its standalone discriminative performance was limited. The subpubic arch angle may provide adjunctive anatomical information within a multifactorial risk assessment framework, rather than serving as an independent screening or diagnostic parameter. Larger prospective and multicenter studies are warranted to further clarify its clinical relevance.
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.