-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2015Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led continuity models and other models of care.
OBJECTIVES
To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 15 trials involving 17,674 women. We assessed the quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes (i.e., regional analgesia (epidural/spinal), caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum), spontaneous vaginal birth, intact perineum, preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) and overall fetal loss and neonatal death (fetal loss was assessed by gestation using 24 weeks as the cut-off for viability in many countries) using the GRADE methodology: All primary outcomes were graded as of high quality.For the primary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience regional analgesia (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14; high quality), instrumental vaginal birth (average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97; participants = 17,501; studies = 13; high quality), preterm birth less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; participants = 13,238; studies = 8; high quality) and less overall fetal/neonatal death (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; participants = 17,561; studies = 13; high quality evidence). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.07; participants = 16,687; studies = 12; high quality). There were no differences between groups for caesarean births or intact perineum.For the secondary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience amniotomy (average RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 3253; studies = 4), episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14) and fetal loss/neonatal death before 24 weeks (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98; participants = 15,645; studies = 11). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; participants = 10,499; studies = 7), have a longer mean length of labour (hours) (mean difference (MD) 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; participants = 3328; studies = 3) and more likely to be attended at birth by a known midwife (average RR 7.04, 95% CI 4.48 to 11.08; participants = 6917; studies = 7). There were no differences between groups for fetal loss or neonatal death more than or equal to 24 weeks, induction of labour, antenatal hospitalisation, antepartum haemorrhage, augmentation/artificial oxytocin during labour, opiate analgesia, perineal laceration requiring suturing, postpartum haemorrhage, breastfeeding initiation, low birthweight infant, five-minute Apgar score less than or equal to seven, neonatal convulsions, admission of infant to special care or neonatal intensive care unit(s) or in mean length of neonatal hospital stay (days).Due to a lack of consistency in measuring women's satisfaction and assessing the cost of various maternity models, these outcomes were reported narratively. The majority of included studies reported a higher rate of maternal satisfaction in midwife-led continuity models of care. Similarly, there was a trend towards a cost-saving effect for midwife-led continuity care compared to other care models.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review suggests that women who received midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience intervention and more likely to be satisfied with their care with at least comparable adverse outcomes for women or their infants than women who received other models of care.Further research is needed to explore findings of fewer preterm births and fewer fetal deaths less than 24 weeks, and overall fetal loss/neonatal death associated with midwife-led continuity models of care.
Topics: Amnion; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Cesarean Section; Continuity of Patient Care; Episiotomy; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Midwifery; Models, Organizational; Patient Satisfaction; Perinatal Care; Postnatal Care; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26370160
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004667.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2017Perineal trauma (due to spontaneous tears, surgical incision (episiotomy) or in association with operative vaginal birth) is common after vaginal birth, and is often... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Perineal trauma (due to spontaneous tears, surgical incision (episiotomy) or in association with operative vaginal birth) is common after vaginal birth, and is often associated with postpartum perineal pain. Birth over an intact perineum may also lead to perineal pain. There are adverse health consequences associated with perineal pain for the women and their babies in the short- and long-term, and the pain may interfere with newborn care and the establishment of breastfeeding. Aspirin has been used in the management of postpartum perineal pain and its effectiveness and safety should be assessed.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy of a single dose of aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), including at different doses, in the relief of acute postpartum perineal pain.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (30 August 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (31 May 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing single dose aspirin compared with placebo, no treatment, a different dose of aspirin, or single dose paracetamol/acetaminophen for women with perineal pain in the early postpartum period. We planned to include cluster-RCTs but none were identified. Quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies were not eligible for inclusion in this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included RCTs. Data were checked for accuracy. The quality of the evidence for the main comparison (aspirin versus placebo) was assessed using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 17 RCTs, with 16 involving 1132 women randomised to aspirin or placebo (one RCT did not report numbers of women). Two RCTs (of 16) did not contribute data to review meta-analyses. All women had perineal pain post-episiotomy, and were not breastfeeding. Studies were published between 1967 and 1997, and the risk of bias was often unclear due to poor reporting.We included four comparisons: aspirin versus placebo (data from 15 RCTs); 300 mg versus 600 mg aspirin (1 RCT); 600 mg versus 1200 mg aspirin (2 RCTs); and 300 mg versus 1200 mg aspirin (1 RCT). Primary outcomes Aspirin versus placeboMore women who received aspirin experienced adequate pain relief compared with women who received placebo over four to eight hours after administration (risk ratio (RR) 2.03, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.69 to 2.42; 13 RCTs, 1001 women; low-quality evidence). Women who received aspirin were less likely to need additional pain relief over four to eight hours after administration (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.37; 10 RCTs, 744 women; very low-quality evidence). There was no difference in maternal adverse effects over four to eight hours post-administration (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.06; 14 RCTs, 1067 women; very low-quality evidence). Subgroup analyses based on dose did not reveal any clear subgroup differences.There was no clear difference over four hours after administration between 300 mg and 600 mg aspirin for adequate pain relief (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.86; 1 RCT, 81 women) or need for additional pain relief (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.12 to 3.88; 1 RCT, 81 women). There were no maternal adverse effects in either aspirin group.There was no clear difference over four to eight hours after administration between 600 mg and 1200 mg aspirin for adequate pain relief (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.39; 2 RCTs, 121 women), need for additional pain relief (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.30 to 5.68; 2 RCTs, 121 women), or maternal adverse effects (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 69.52; 2 RCTs, 121 women).There was no clear difference over four hours after administration between 300 mg and 1200 mg aspirin for adequate pain relief (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.32; 1 RCT, 80 women) or need for additional pain relief (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.19 to 21.18; 1 RCT, 80 women). There were no maternal adverse effects in either aspirin group.None of the included RCTs reported on neonatal adverse effects. Secondary outcomesNo studies reported on secondary review outcomes: prolonged hospitalisation due to perineal pain; re-hospitalisation due to perineal pain; fully breastfeeding at discharge; mixed feeding at discharge; fully breastfeeding at six weeks; mixed feeding at six weeks; perineal pain at six weeks; maternal views; maternal postpartum depression.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found low-quality evidence to suggest that single dose aspirin compared with placebo can increase pain relief in women with perineal pain post-episiotomy. Very low-quality evidence also suggested that aspirin can reduce the need for additional analgesia, without increasing maternal adverse effects. Evidence was downgraded based on study limitations (risk of bias), imprecision, and publication bias or both. RCTs excluded breastfeeding women so there is no evidence to assess the effects of aspirin on neonatal adverse effects or breastfeeding.With international guidance recommending mothers initiate breastfeeding within one hour of birth, and exclusively breastfeed for the first six months, the evidence from this review is not applicable to current recommended best practice. Aspirin may be considered for use in non-breastfeeding women with post-episiotomy perineal pain. Although formal assessment was beyond the remit of this review, current guidance suggests that other analgesic drugs (including paracetamol) should be considered first for postpartum perineal pain. Such agents are the focus of other reviews in this series on drugs for perineal pain in the early postpartum period. It is considered most likely that if RCTs are conducted in the future they could compare aspirin with other pain relievers. Future RCTs should be designed to ensure high methodological quality, and address gaps in the evidence, such as the secondary outcomes established for this review. Current research has focused on women with post-episiotomy pain, future RCTs could be extended to women with perineal pain associated with spontaneous tears or operative birth.
Topics: Acute Pain; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Aspirin; Female; Humans; Obstetric Labor Complications; Perineum; Placebo Effect; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 28181214
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012129.pub2 -
International Journal of Surgery... Sep 2016The Anterior Perineal PlanE for ultra-low Anterior Resection of the rectum (APPEAR) technique utilises a perineal incision to facilitate resection of the distal rectum.... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The Anterior Perineal PlanE for ultra-low Anterior Resection of the rectum (APPEAR) technique utilises a perineal incision to facilitate resection of the distal rectum. The aim of this study was to review use of the APPEAR technique, assessing patient selection, indications, complications and outcomes, both oncological and functional.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review was carried out to identify studies reporting outcomes following rectal resection via an anterior perineal incision, with no limits on year or language. All studies were included. Quality of studies was assessed using the methodological index for non-randomised studies (MINORS) score.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies were identified from 1985 to 2013. 174 patients (102 male), ranging from 21 to 82 years, underwent surgery at eleven centres in seven countries. Maximum experience at one centre is 60 cases. 9 cases were performed for rectal dysplasia, 141 for rectal cancer; 96 resections were R0 (remaining 45 unstated). 14 cases were carried out laparoscopically. 30-day mortality was 2.3% (4 patients); there were 2 further deaths from systemic recurrence. Permanent stoma rate was 8/155 (5%). The most frequent complication was perineal or vaginal fistulation (26 patients): 6 underwent reoperation; 15 healed with conservative management; 5 required a permanent stoma. Functional outcomes were variably reported; median stool frequency was 3/24hrs with average Wexner scores of 5-5.5.
CONCLUSION
In selected patients the APPEAR technique offers avoidance of permanent colostomy with good oncological outcomes. The majority of studies had short follow up periods and longer-term outcomes will need evaluation.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Colostomy; Female; Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Middle Aged; Perineum; Rectal Diseases; Reoperation; Surgical Stomas; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 27500960
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.07.075 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2017Maternal pushing during the second stage of labour is an important and indispensable contributor to the involuntary expulsive force developed by uterine contraction.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Maternal pushing during the second stage of labour is an important and indispensable contributor to the involuntary expulsive force developed by uterine contraction. There is no consensus on an ideal strategy to facilitate these expulsive efforts and there are contradictory results about the influence on the mother and fetus.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and possible disadvantages of different kinds of techniques regarding maternal pushing/breathing during the expulsive stage of labour on maternal and fetal outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (19 September 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs assessing the effects of pushing/bearing down techniques (type and/or timing) performed during the second stage of labour on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion, but none were identified. Studies using a cross-over design and those published in abstract form only were not eligible for inclusion in this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were checked for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
In this updated review, we included 21 studies in total, eight (884 women) comparing spontaneous pushing versus directed pushing, with or without epidural analgesia and 13 (2879 women) comparing delayed pushing versus immediate pushing with epidural analgesia. Our GRADE assessments of evidence ranged from moderate to very low quality; the main reasons for downgrading were study design limitations and imprecision of effect estimates. Overall, the included studies varied in their risk of bias; most were judged to be at unclear risk of bias. Comparison 1: types of pushing: spontaneous pushing versus directed pushingThere was no clear difference in the duration of the second stage of labour (mean difference (MD) 10.26 minutes; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.12 to 21.64 minutes, six studies, 667 women, random-effects, I² = 81%) (very low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference in 3rd or 4th degree perineal laceration (risk ratio (RR) 0.87; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.66, one study, 320 women) (low-quality evidence), episiotomy (average RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.85, two studies, 420 women, random-effects, I² = 81%), duration of pushing (MD -9.76 minutes, 95% CI -19.54 to 0.02; two studies; 169 women; I² = 88%) (very low-quality evidence), or rate of spontaneous vaginal delivery (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.05; five studies; 688 women; I² = 2%) (moderate-quality evidence). For primary neonatal outcomes such as five-minute Apgar score less than seven, there was no clear difference between groups (RR 0.35; 95% CI 0.01 to 8.43, one study, 320 infants) (very low-quality evidence), and the number of admissions to neonatal intensive care (RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.30 to 3.79, two studies, 393 infants) (very low-quality evidence) also showed no clear difference between spontaneous and directed pushing. No data were available on hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Comparison 2: timing of pushing: delayed pushing versus immediate pushing (all women with epidural)For the primary maternal outcomes, delayed pushing was associated with an increase of 56 minutes in the duration of the second stage of labour (MD 56.40, 95% CI 42.05 to 70.76; 11 studies; 3049 women; I² = 91%) (very low-quality evidence), but no clear difference in third or 4th degree perineal laceration (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.14, seven studies. 2775 women) (moderate-quality evidence) or episiotomy (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.04, five studies, 2320 women). Delayed pushing was also associated with a 19-minute decrease in the duration of pushing (MD -19.05, 95% CI -32.27 to -5.83; 11 studies; 2932 women; I² = 95%) (very low-quality evidence) and an increase in spontaneous vaginal delivery (RR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11, 12 studies, 3114 women) (moderate-quality evidence).For the primary neonatal outcomes, there was no clear difference between groups in admission to neonatal intensive care (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.67 to 1.41, three studies, n = 2197) (low-quality evidence) and five-minute Apgar score less than seven (RR 0.15; 95% CI 0.01 to 3.00; three studies; 413 infants) (very low-quality evidence). There were no data on hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy. Delayed pushing was associated with a greater incidence of low umbilical cord blood pH (RR 2.24; 95% CI 1.37 to 3.68, 4 studies, 2145 infants) and increased the cost of intrapartum care by CDN$ 68.22 (MD 68.22, 95% CI 55.37, 81.07, one study, 1862 women).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This updated review is based on 21 included studies of moderate to very low quality of evidence (with evidence mainly downgraded due to study design limitations and imprecision of effect estimates).Timing of pushing with epidural is consistent in that delayed pushing leads to a shortening of the actual time pushing and increase of spontaneous vaginal delivery at the expense of an overall longer duration of the second stage of labour and an increased risk of a low umbilical cord pH (based only on one study). Nevertheless, there was no clear difference in serious perineal laceration and episiotomy, and in other neonatal outcomes (admission to neonatal intensive care, five-minute Apgar score less than seven and delivery room resuscitation) between delayed and immediate pushing.Therefore, for the type of pushing, with or without epidural, there is no conclusive evidence to support or refute any specific style as part of routine clinical practice, and in the absence of strong evidence supporting a specific method or timing of pushing, the woman's preference and comfort and clinical context should guide decisions.Further properly well-designed RCTs, addressing clinically important maternal and neonatal outcomes are required to add evidence-based information to the current knowledge. Such trials will provide more complete data to be incorporated into a future update of this review.
Topics: Adult; Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Breath Holding; Delivery, Obstetric; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intensive Care Units, Neonatal; Labor Stage, Second; Perineum; Pregnancy; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration; Time Factors; Uterine Contraction; Valsalva Maneuver
PubMed: 28349526
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009124.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2017The female perineum becomes suffused and stretched during pregnancy, and further strain during vaginal childbirth contributes to approximately 85% of women experiencing... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The female perineum becomes suffused and stretched during pregnancy, and further strain during vaginal childbirth contributes to approximately 85% of women experiencing some degree of trauma to the perineal region. Multiple factors play a role in the type and severity of trauma experienced, including parity, delivery method, and local practices. There is ongoing debate about best midwifery practice to reduce perineal trauma. Once perineal trauma has occurred, treatment also varies greatly, depending on its degree and severity, local practice and customs, and personal preference. In order to optimise wound-healing outcomes, it is important that wounds are assessed and managed in an appropriate and timely manner. A perineal wound may cause significant physical and/or psychological impact in the short or long term, however little evidence is available on this subject.Antenatal education serves to prepare women and their partners for pregnancy, delivery and the postpartum period. The delivery of this education varies widely in type, content, and nature. This review examined antenatal education which is specifically tailored towards perineal care and wound healing in the postnatal period via formal channels. Appropriate patient education positively impacts on wound-healing rates and compliance with wound care. Risk factors that contribute to the breakdown of wounds and poor healing rates may be addressed antenatally in order to optimise postnatal wound healing. It is important to assess whether or not antenatal wound-care education positively affects perineal healing, in order to empower women to incorporate best practice, evidence-based treatment with this important aspect of self-care in the immediate postnatal period.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of antenatal education on perineal wound healing in postnatal women who have birthed in a hospital setting, and who have experienced a break in the skin of the perineum as a result of a tear or episiotomy, or both.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 September 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov (8th September 2017), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (8th September 2017) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which referred to all formal methods of antenatal education and addressed care of a potential perineal wound as a result of a tear or episiotomy, which was experienced by pregnant women who planned to give birth within a hospital setting.Trials using a cluster-RCT and a quasi-randomised design would have been eligible for inclusion in this review but none were identified. Cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion in this review. Studies published in abstract form would have been eligible for inclusion in this review, but none were identified.We planned to consider all formal methods of antenatal education which addressed care of a perineal wound. We also planned to consider all contact points where there was an opportunity for formal education, including midwifery appointments, antenatal education classes, obstetrician appointments, general practitioner appointments and physiotherapist appointments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed titles and abstracts of the studies identified by the search strategy for their eligibility.
MAIN RESULTS
No studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. We excluded one study and one other study is ongoing.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We set out to evaluate the RCT evidence pertaining to the impact of antenatal education on perineal wound healing in postnatal women who have birthed in a hospital setting, and who experienced a break in the skin of the perineum as a result of a tear or episiotomy, or both. However, no studies met the inclusion criteria. There is a lack of evidence concerning whether or not antenatal education relating to perineal wound healing in this cohort of women will change the outcome for these women in relation to wound healing, infection rate, re-attendance or re-admission to hospital, pain, health-related quality of life, maternal bonding, and negative emotional experiences. Further study is warranted in this area given the significant physical, psychological and economic impact of perineal wounds, and the large proportion of childbearing women who have experienced a postnatal wound. The benefits of any future research in this field would be maximised by incorporating women in a range of socio-economic groups, and with a range of healthcare options. This research could take both a qualitative and a quantitative approach and examine the outcomes identified in this review in order to assess fully the potential benefits of a tailored antenatal package, and to make recommendations for future practice. There is currently no evidence to inform practice in this regard.
Topics: Female; Humans; Mothers; Perineum; Postnatal Care; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Wound Healing
PubMed: 29205275
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012258.pub2 -
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2024Non-pharmaceutical midwifery techniques, including perineal warm compresses, to improve maternal outcomes remain controversial. The aims of this study are to assess the... (Review)
Review
Effects of Perineal Warm Compresses during the Second Stage of Labor on Reducing Perineal Trauma and Relieving Postpartum Perineal Pain in Primiparous Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.
Non-pharmaceutical midwifery techniques, including perineal warm compresses, to improve maternal outcomes remain controversial. The aims of this study are to assess the effects of perineal warm compresses on reducing perineal trauma and postpartum perineal pain relief. This systematic review included randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We searched seven bibliographic databases, three RCT register websites, and two dissertation databases for publications from inception to 15 March 2023. Chinese and English publications were included. Two independent reviewers conducted the risk of bias assessment, data extraction, and the evaluation of the certainty of the evidence utilizing the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 assessment criteria, the Review Manager 5.4, and the online GRADEpro tool, respectively. Seven RCTs involving 1362 primiparous women were included. The combined results demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the second-, third- and/or fourth- degree perineal lacerations, the incidence of episiotomy, and the relief of the short-term perineal pain postpartum (within two days). There was a potential favorable effect on improving the integrity of the perineum. However, the results did not show a statistically significant supportive effect on reducing first-degree perineal lacerations and the rate of perineal lacerations requiring sutures. In summary, perineal warm compresses effectively reduced the second-, third-/or fourth-degree perineal trauma and decreased the short-term perineal pain after birth.
PubMed: 38610125
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12070702 -
Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao. Yi Xue Ban =... Mar 2017Whether extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) improves survival and safety remains controversial. Systematic review of all comparative studies to define the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Whether extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) improves survival and safety remains controversial. Systematic review of all comparative studies to define the superiority of ELAPE to conventional abdominoperineal excision (APE). Methods: Corresponding data, with case-control studies or cohorts regarding intraoperative perforation rate, the local recurrence rate and postoperative complications in the ELAPE group and the APE group, were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature (CMB), VIP, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Database. Meta-analysis was performed by using RenMan 5.2. Results: A total of 10 articles were included. Intraperative perforation rate (MD=0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.39, P=0.03), local recurrence rate (MD=0.30, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.42, P<0.001) in the ELAPE group was significantly lower than that in the APE group. The difference in positive margin rate between the 2 groups was not statistically significant (P=0.07). Conclusion: Through gap repair of episiotomy and individualized therapy can improve ELAPE postoperative quality of life. ELAPE shows certain advantages in treating lower rectal cancer comparing to APE, but it should pay attention to individualized treatment. More studies through large sample multi-center, medium and long term randomized design are necessary to determine the effect of surgery on tumor.
Topics: Abdominal Wall; China; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Episiotomy; Female; Humans; Intraoperative Complications; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Perineum; Quality of Life; Rectal Neoplasms
PubMed: 28364107
DOI: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2017.03.014 -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Oct 2017In recent years, a large number of studies have been published on the clinical relevance of pelvic floor three-dimensional (3D) transperineal ultrasound. Several studies... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
In recent years, a large number of studies have been published on the clinical relevance of pelvic floor three-dimensional (3D) transperineal ultrasound. Several studies compare sonography with other imaging modalities or clinical examination. The quality of reporting in these studies is not known. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the compliance of diagnostic accuracy studies investigating pelvic floor 3D ultrasound with the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) guidelines.
METHODS
Published articles on pelvic floor 3D ultrasound were identified by a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Web of Science and Scopus databases. Prospective and retrospective studies that compared pelvic floor 3D ultrasound with other clinical and imaging diagnostics were included in the analysis. STARD compliance was assessed and quantified by two independent investigators, using 22 of the original 25 STARD checklist items. Items with the qualifier 'if done' (Items 13, 23 and 24) were excluded because they were not applicable to all papers. Each item was scored as reported (score = 1) or not reported (score = 0). Observer variability, the total number of reported STARD items per article and summary scores for each item were calculated. The difference in total score between STARD-adopting and non-adopting journals was tested statistically, as was the effect of year of publication.
RESULTS
Forty studies published in 13 scientific journals were included in the analysis. Mean ± SD STARD checklist score of the included articles was 16.0 ± 2.5 out of a maximum of 22 points. The lowest scores (< 50%) were found for reporting of handling of indeterminate results or missing responses, adverse events and the time interval between tests. Interobserver agreement for rating the STARD items was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.77). An independent t-test showed no significant mean difference ± SD in total STARD checklist score between STARD-adopting and non-adopting journals (16.4 ± 2.2 vs 15.9 ± 2.6, respectively). Mean ± SD STARD checklist score for articles published in 2003-2009 was lower, but not statistically different, compared with those published in 2010-2015 (15.2 ± 2.5 vs 16.6 ± 2.4, respectively).
CONCLUSION
The overall compliance with reporting guidelines of diagnostic accuracy studies on pelvic floor 3D transperineal ultrasound is relatively good compared with other fields of medicine. However, specific checklist items require more attention when reported. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Topics: Anatomic Landmarks; Checklist; Female; Guideline Adherence; Guidelines as Topic; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Pelvic Floor; Perineum; Quality Control; Reproducibility of Results; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 28000958
DOI: 10.1002/uog.17390 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2015During childbirth, many women sustain trauma to the perineum, which is the area between the vaginal opening and the anus. These tears can involve the perineal skin, the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
During childbirth, many women sustain trauma to the perineum, which is the area between the vaginal opening and the anus. These tears can involve the perineal skin, the pelvic floor muscles, the external and internal anal sphincter muscles as well as the rectal mucosa (lining of the bowel). When these tears extend beyond the external anal sphincter they are called 'obstetric anal sphincter injuries' (OASIS). When women sustain an OASIS, they are at increased risk of developing anal incontinence either immediately following birth or later in life. Anal incontinence is associated with significant medical, hygiene and social problems. Endoanal ultrasound (EAUS) can be performed with a bedside scanner by inserting a small probe into the anus and the structures of the anal canal and perineum can be reviewed in real-time. We proposed that by examining the perineum with EAUS after the birth of the baby and before the tear has been repaired, there would be an increase in detection of OASIS. This increased detection could lead to improved primary repair of the external and internal anal sphincter resulting in reduced rates of anal incontinence and improved quality of life for women. EAUS may also have a role after perineal repair in the evaluation of residual injury and may help guide a woman's management in subsequent pregnancies and allow for early referral to specialised units, minimising long-term complications.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of EAUS in the detection of OASIS following vaginal birth and in reducing the risk of anal sphincter complications related to OASIS.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2015) and reference list of the one retrieved study.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised control trials (RCTs) comparing EAUS versus no ultrasound in women prior to repair of perineal trauma and EAUS performed after perineal repair. RCTs published in abstract form only and trials using a cluster-randomised design were eligible for inclusion, but none were identified.Trials using a cross-over design and quasi-RCTs were not eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The two review authors independently assessed the single trial for inclusion and assessed trial quality. Both review authors independently extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
We included one trial that randomised 752 primiparous women with clinically detectable second-degree perineal tears to either further assessment with EAUS prior to perineal repair or standard care. We assessed this trial as being at a low risk of bias. The trial reported women's anal incontinence at three and 12 months as well as their pain scores and quality of life assessment. The trial authors reported outcomes at three months for 719 women (364 in the experimental group, 355 in the control group, 4% loss to follow-up), and an outcome at 12 months for 684 women (342 in the experimental group, 342 in the control group, 9% loss to follow-up). Primary outcomeCompared with clinical examination (routine care), the use of EAUS prior to perineal repair was associated with a reduction in the rate of severe anal incontinence (defined as involuntary loss of faeces or flatus that constitutes social and/or hygiene problems, or as defined by authors), at greater than six months postpartum (risk ratio (RR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.97, 684 women at the 12-month time point). Secondary outcomes Severe anal incontinence at less than six months was reduced with the use of EAUS prior to repair when compared with clinical examination (routine care) (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.72, 719 women). However, increased perineal pain at three months was associated with the use of EAUS prior to perineal repair when compared with routine care (RR 5.86, 95% CI 1.74 to 19.72, 684 women). There was no clear difference in the number of women who reported any anal incontinence at either less than six months or equal to or greater than six months (outcomes not prespecified in our published protocol). Similarly, there was no clear difference between groups in terms of faecal incontinence, flatal incontinence, faecal urgency, or maternal quality of life. The study did not report any data on the need for secondary repair of external anal sphincter, dyspareunia, women's satisfaction with care or the planned or actual mode of birth in any subsequent pregnancy. We were unable to assess the detection rates of OASIS with EAUS from the included study because women with clinically-detected OASIS were excluded from randomisation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is some evidence to suggest that EAUS prior to perineal repair is associated with reduced risk of severe anal incontinence but an increase in the incidence of perineal pain at three months postpartum. However, these results are based on one small study involving 752 women. The study took place in a large teaching hospital with an average to busy labour ward. The trial participants were similar to those found in most large obstetric units in developed countries, thus increasing applicability of the evidence, but were restricted to primiparous women.More research is needed to further evaluate the effectiveness of EAUS in the detection of OASIS following vaginal birth and in reducing the risk of anal sphincter complications related to OASIS. More high-quality RCTs are needed to fully evaluate the intervention before the routine use of EAUS on the labour ward could be supported. It would be particularly useful if future trials could assess detection rates of OASIS with EAUS versus clinical examination alone as this is the basis of the theory for improved outcomes with this intervention. Cost and the training required to implement EAUS should be considered, along with maternal quality of life and individual symptoms experienced by postnatal women . It would also be useful to follow up women after their subsequent vaginal births to determine if subsequent mode of delivery affects long-term outcomes. Future studies in multiparous women may also be useful.
Topics: Adult; Anal Canal; Endosonography; Fecal Incontinence; Female; Humans; Lacerations; Parity; Parturition; Perineum; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26513224
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010826.pub2 -
Perspectives on the Therapeutic Effects of Pelvic Floor Electrical Stimulation: A Systematic Review.International Journal of Environmental... Oct 2022Pelvic, perineal, and nervous lesions, which derive principally from pregnancy and childbirth, may lead to pelvic floor dysfunctions, such as organ prolapses and lesions...
Pelvic, perineal, and nervous lesions, which derive principally from pregnancy and childbirth, may lead to pelvic floor dysfunctions, such as organ prolapses and lesions in the nerves and muscles due to muscle expansion and physiology. It is estimated that 70% of women affected by this clinical picture have symptoms that do not respond to the classical treatments with antimuscarinic and anticholinergic drugs. Therefore, resorting to efficient alternatives and less invasive methods is necessary to assist this public health problem that predominantly affects the female population, which is more susceptible to the risk factors. This study aimed to perform an updated and comprehensive literature review focused on the effects of pelvic floor electrical stimulation, considering new perspectives such as a correlation between electric current and site of intervention and other molecular aspects, different from the present reviews that predominantly evaluate urodynamic aspects. For that purpose, PubMed and ScienceDirect databases were used to perform the search, and the method was applied. With well-researched therapeutic effects, electrical stimulation induced promising results in histological, nervous, and molecular evaluations and spinal processes, which showed beneficial results and revealed new perspectives on ways to evoke responses in the lower urinary tract in a non-invasive way. Thus, it is possible to conclude that this type of intervention may be a non-invasive alternative to treat pelvic and perineal dysfunctions.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Pelvic Floor; Electric Stimulation; Urodynamics; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Perineum; Exercise Therapy
PubMed: 36360918
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192114035