Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Lateral episiotomy or no episiotomy in vacuum assisted delivery in nulliparous women (EVA): multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial
Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Women's and Children's Health, Centre for Clinical Research Dalarna, Falun, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2024 (English)In: BMJ. British Medical Journal, ISSN 0959-8146, E-ISSN 0959-535X, Vol. 385, article id e079014Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: To assess the effect of lateral episiotomy, compared with no episiotomy, on obstetric anal sphincter injury in nulliparous women requiring vacuum extraction. Design: A multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial.

Setting: Eight hospitals in Sweden, 2017-23.

Participants: 717 nulliparous women with a single live fetus of 34 gestational weeks or more, requiring vacuum extraction were randomly assigned (1:1) to lateral episiotomy or no episiotomy using sealed opaque envelopes. Randomisation was stratified by study site.

Intervention: A standardised lateral episiotomy was performed during the vacuum extraction, at crowning of the fetal head, starting 1-3 cm from the posterior fourchette, at a 60° (45-80°) angle from the midline, and 4 cm (3-5 cm) long. The comparison was no episiotomy unless considered indispensable.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome of the episiotomy in vacuum assisted delivery (EVA) trial was obstetric anal sphincter injury, clinically diagnosed by combined visual inspection and digital rectal and vaginal examination. The primary analysis used a modified intention-to-treat population that included all consenting women with attempted or successful vacuum extraction. As a result of an interim analysis at significance level P<0.01, the primary endpoint was tested at 4% significance level with accompanying 96% confidence interval (CI).

Results: From 1 July 2017 to 15 February 2023, 717 women were randomly assigned: 354 (49%) to lateral episiotomy and 363 (51%) to no episiotomy. Before vacuum extraction attempt, one woman withdrew consent and 14 had a spontaneous birth, leaving 702 for the primary analysis. In the intervention group, 21 (6%) of 344 women sustained obstetric anal sphincter injury, compared with 47 (13%) of 358 women in the comparison group (P=0.002). The risk difference was -7.0% (96% CI -11.7% to -2.5%). The risk ratio adjusted for site was 0.47 (96% CI 0.23 to 0.97) and unadjusted risk ratio was 0.46 (0.28 to 0.78). No significant differences were noted between groups in postpartum pain, blood loss, neonatal outcomes, or total adverse events, but the intervention group had more wound infections and dehiscence.

Conclusions: Lateral episiotomy can be recommended for nulliparous women requiring vacuum extraction to significantly reduce the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02643108.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, 2024. Vol. 385, article id e079014
National Category
Gynaecology, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-227328DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-079014ISI: 001255882100001PubMedID: 38886011Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85196484963OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-227328DiVA, id: diva2:1880773
Funder
Region Stockholm, FoUI-960261/2021Swedish Research Council, 2016-00526Available from: 2024-07-02 Created: 2024-07-02 Last updated: 2025-04-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(446 kB)58 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 446 kBChecksum SHA-512
3e420666cf1892faa8a567beb0e10d3063940b9929eeed2dfb98e25b0c2663d526a6b4250bc6013093b98236c24c12065c888a3048cf8167f4aa6b7fd98d2095
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Wihlbäck, Anna-Carin

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wihlbäck, Anna-Carin
By organisation
Obstetrics and Gynecology
In the same journal
BMJ. British Medical Journal
Gynaecology, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 58 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 677 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf