ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2026
Risk factors associated with deep perineal wound dehiscence after second-degree perineal tears or episiotomy.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2026. 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.
- Risk factors associated with deep perineal wound dehiscence after second-degree perineal tears or episiotomy.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSecond-degree perineal tears and episiotomies, involving the bulbocavernosus and/or superficial transverse perineal muscles, are common after vaginal birth and may lead to wound dehiscence, infection, and long-term pelvic floor dysfunction. Despite this, risk factors for deep wound dehiscence involving perineal musculature remain insufficiently studied. This study aimed to identify risk factors for wound dehiscence in second-degree tears and episiotomies to inform potential use of antibiotic prophylaxis. MATERIAL AND
methodsA single-center case-control study (1:2 ratio) was conducted including 105 cases with 2nd degree perineal tears or episiotomies complicated by deep wound dehiscence, diagnosed within two weeks postpartum and 210 controls with second-degree tears or episiotomies without dehiscence. Exposure data were retrieved from medical records. Univariate analyses were performed on a priori selected exposure variables, using Mann-Whitney U and Fisher's exact tests. Variable selection used Lasso regression with leave-one-out cross-validation. Multivariate logistic regression generated adjusted odds ratios (aOR). Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsWomen with wound dehiscence were more often vaginal primiparas (87% vs 69%, p < 0.001) and had higher rates of episiotomy (33% vs 7%, p < 0.001). Intrapartum antibiotics were administered less frequently among cases (7% vs 20%, p = 0.002). Cases had longer second stage of labor, more active pushing, and greater postpartum bleeding. After multivariate adjustment, only episiotomy (aOR 4.40, 95% CI 2.10-9.64) and intrapartum antibiotic administration (aOR 0.21, 95% CI 0.07-0.50) remained significantly associated with wound dehiscence.
conclusionsEpisiotomy substantially increased the risk of deep perineal wound dehiscence compared with spontaneous second-degree perineal tears, while intrapartum antibiotics were protective. These findings support selective episiotomy use and suggest that antibiotic prophylaxis may reduce this risk in women with second-degree perineal tears or episiotomies.
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.