Third degree obstetric anal sphincter tears: risk factors and outcome of primary repair
- 2 April 1994
- Vol. 308 (6933) , 887-891
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.308.6933.887
Abstract
Objectives To determine (i) risk factors in the development of third degree obstetric tears and (ii) the success of primary sphincter repair. Design (i) Retrospective analysis of obstetric variables in 50 women who had sustained a third degree tear, compared with the remaining 8553 vaginal deliveries during the same period. (ii) Women who had sustained a third degree tear and had primary sphincter repair and control subjects were interviewed and investigated with anal endosonography, anal manometry, and pudendal nerve terminal motor latency measurements Setting: Antenatal clinic in teaching hospital in inner London. Subjects (i) All women (n=8603) who delivered vaginally over a 31 month period. (ii) 34 women who sustained a third degree tear and 88 matched controls. Main outcome measures : Obstetric risk factors, defaecatory symptoms, sonographic sphincter defects, and pudendal nerve damage. Results - (i) Factors significantly associated with development of a third degree tear were: forceps delivery (50% v 7% in controls; P=0.00001), primiparous delivery (85% v 43%; P=0.00001), birth weight >4 kg (P=0.00002), and occipitoposterior position at delivery (P=0.003). No third degree tear occurred during 351 vacuum extractions. Eleven of 25 (44%) women who were delivered without instruments and had a third degree tear did so despite a posterolateral episiotomy. (ii) Anal incontinence or faecal urgency was present in 16 women with tears and 11 controls (47% v 13%;20P=0.00001). Sonographic sphincter defects were identified in 29 with tears and 29 controls (85% v 33%; P=0.00001). Every symptomatic patient had persistent combined internal and external sphincter defects, and these were associated with significantly lower anal pressures. Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency measurements were not significantly different. Conclusions Vacuum, extraction is associated with fewer third degree tears than forceps delivery. An episiotomy does not always prevent a third degree tear. Primary repair is inadequate in most women who sustain third degree tears, most having residual sphincter defects and about half experiencing anal incontinence, which is caused by persistent mechanical sphincter disruption rather than pudendal nerve damage. Attention should be directed towards preventive obstetric practice and surgical techniques of repair.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Anal-Sphincter Disruption during Vaginal DeliveryNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993
- Risks of anal incontinence from subsequent vaginal delivery after a complete obstetric anal sphincter tearBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1992
- Anal endosonographic findings in the follow-up of primarily sutured sphincteric rupturesBritish Journal of Surgery, 1992
- Unsuspected sphincter damage following childbirth revealed by anal endosonographyThe British Journal of Radiology, 1991
- Advantage or Disadvantage of Episiotomy Compared with Spontaneous Perineal LacerationGynecologic and Obstetric Investigation, 1991
- Episiotomy: Can its routine use be defended?American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1989
- The obstetric vacuum extractor is the instrument of first choice for operative vaginal deliveryBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989
- EFFECT OF EPISIOTOMY ON THE FREQUENCY OF VAGINAL OUTLET LACERATIONS1986
- Anal Sphincter ReconstructionSurgical Clinics of North America, 1980
- MORBIDITY IN THIRD-DEGREE LACERATION1962