Analysis of the obstetrician's posture and movements during a simulated forceps delivery

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to identify and qualify, by means of a three-dimensional kinematic analysis, the postures and movements of obstetricians during a simulated forceps birth, and then to study the association of the obstetricians' experience with the technique adopted.

METHOD

Fifty-seven volunteer obstetricians, 20 from the Limoges and 37 from the Poitiers University hospitals, were included in this multi-centric study. They were classified into 3 groups: beginners, intermediates, and experts, beginners having performed fewer than 10 forceps deliveries in real conditions, intermediates between 10 and 100, and experts more than 100. The posture and movements of the obstetricians were recorded between December 2020 and March 2021 using an optoelectronic motion capture system during simulated forceps births. Joint angles qualifying these postures and movements were analysed between the three phases of the foetal traction. These phases were defined by the passage of a virtual point associated with the forceps blade through two anatomical planes: the mid-pelvis and the pelvic outlet. Then, a consolidated ascending hierarchical classification (AHC) was applied to these data in order to objectify the existence of groups of similar behaviours.

RESULTS

The AHC distinguished four different postures adopted when crossing the first plane and three different traction techniques. 48% of the beginners adopted one of the two raised posture, 22% being raised without trunk flexion and 26% raised with trunk flexion. Conversely, 58% of the experts positioned themselves in a "chevalier servant" posture (going down on one knee) and 25% in a "squatting" posture before initiating traction. The results also show that the joint movement amplitude tends to reduce with the level of expertise.

CONCLUSION

Forceps delivery was performed in different ways, with the experienced obstetricians favouring postures that enabled observation at the level of the maternal perineum and techniques reducing movement amplitude. The first perspective of this work is to relate these different techniques to the traction force generated. The results of these studies have the potential to contribute to the training of obstetricians in forceps delivery, and to improve the safety of women and newborns.

Ultrasound vs routine care before instrumental vaginal delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The objective was to report the role of intrapartum ultrasound examination in affecting maternal and perinatal outcome in women undergoing instrumental vaginal delivery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrial.gov databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials comparing ultrasound assessment of fetal head position vs routine standard care (digital examination) before instrumental vaginal delivery (either vacuum or forceps). The primary outcome was failed instrumental delivery extraction followed by cesarean section. Secondary outcomes were postpartum hemorrhage, 3rd or 4th degree perineal lacerations, episiotomy, prolonged hospital stay, Apgar score<7 at 5 min, umbilical artery pH <7.0 and base excess greater than -12 mEq, admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), shoulder dystocia, birth trauma, a composite score of adverse maternal and neonatal outcome and incorrect diagnosis of fetal head position. Risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2). The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Head-to-head meta-analyses using a random-effect model were used to analyze the data and results are reported as relative risk with their 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Five studies were included (1463 women). There was no difference in the maternal, pregnancy or labor characteristics between the two groups. An ultrasound assessment prior to instrumental vaginal delivery did not affect the cesarean section rate compared with standard care (p = 0.805). Likewise, the risk of composite adverse maternal outcome (p = 0.428), perineal lacerations (p = 0.800), postpartum hemorrhage (p = 0.303), shoulder dystocia (p = 0.862) and prolonged stay in hospital (p = 0.059) were not different between the two groups. Composite adverse neonatal outcome was not different between the women undergoing and those not undergoing ultrasound assessment prior to instrumental delivery (p = 0.400). Likewise, there was no increased risk with abnormal Apgar score (p = 0.882), umbilical artery pH < 7.2 (p = 0.713), base excess greater than -12 (p = 0.742), admission to NICU (p = 0.879) or birth trauma (p = 0.968). The risk of having an incorrect diagnosis of fetal head position was lower when ultrasound was performed before instrumental delivery, with a relative risk of 0.16 (95% confidence interval 0.1-0.3; I² :77%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although ultrasound examination was associated with a lower rate of incorrect diagnoses of fetal head position and station, this did not translate to any improvement of maternal or neonatal outcomes.

Comparison of surgical versus medical termination of pregnancy between 13-20 weeks of gestation in Ethiopia: A quasi-experimental study

Background

Dilation and evacuation is a method of second trimester pregnancy termination introduced recently in Ethiopia. However, little is known about the safety and effectiveness of this method in an Ethiopian setting. Therefore, the study is intended to determine the safety and effectiveness of dilation and evacuation for surgical abortion as compared to medical abortion between 13–20 weeks’ gestational age.

Methods

This is a quasi-experimental study of women receiving second trimester termination of pregnancy between 13–20 weeks. Patients were allocated to either medical or surgical abortion based on their preference. A structured questionnaire was used to collect demographic information and clinical data upon admission. Procedure related information was collected after the procedure was completed and before the patient was discharged. Additionally, women were contacted 2 weeks after the procedure to evaluate for post-procedural complications. The primary outcome of the study was a composite complication rate. Data were collected using Open Data Kit and then analyzed using Stata version 14.2. Univariate analyses were performed using means (standard deviation), or medians (interquartile range) when the distribution was not normal. Multiple logistic regression was also performed to control for confounders.

Results

Two hundred nineteen women chose medical abortion and 60 chose surgical abortion. The composite complication rate is not significantly different among medical and surgical abortion patients (15% versus 10%; p = 0.52). Nine patients (4.1%) in the medical arm required additional intervention to complete the abortion, while none of the surgical abortion patients required additional intervention. Median (IQR) hospital stay was significantly longer in the medical group at 24 (12–24) hours versus 6(4–6) hours in the surgical group p<0.001.

Conclusion

From the current study findings, we concluded that there is no difference in safety between surgical and medical methods of abortion. This study demonstrates that surgical abortion can be used as a safe and effective alternative to medical abortion and should be offered equivalently with medical abortion, per the patient’s preference.

The acceptability to women of techniques for managing an impacted fetal head at caesarean section and of randomised trials evaluating those techniques: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to explore women's views on the acceptability of different techniques for managing an impacted fetal head at caesarean; and the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a trial in this area.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews with a systematic sample of women who experienced second stage emergency caesarean section at a tertiary National Health Service (NHS) hospital in England, UK. Thematic analysis was used to extract women's views.

RESULTS

Women varied in their perceptions of the acceptability of different techniques for managing impacted fetal head. Trust in medical expertise and prioritising the safety of the baby were important contextual factors. Greater consensus was found around informed choice in trials where subthemes considered the timing of invitation, reduced capacity to give consent in emergency situations, and the importance of birth outcomes and having good rapport with healthcare professionals who invite women into trials. Finally, women reflected on the importance of supportive antenatal and postpartum education for impacted fetal head.

CONCLUSIONS

This research provides information on the acceptability of techniques and any trial to evaluate these techniques. Findings illustrate the importance of context and quality of care to both acceptability and approaching women to take part in a future trial.

Society of Family Planning clinical recommendations: Cervical preparation for dilation and evacuation at 20-24 weeks' gestation

Although only 1.3% of abortions in the United States are between 20 and 24 weeks' gestation, these procedures are associated with elevated risks of morbidity and mortality. Adequate cervical preparation before dilation and evacuation (D&E) at 20-24 weeks' gestation reduces procedural risk. For this gestational range, at least one day of cervical preparation with osmotic dilators is recommended before D&E. The use of overnight osmotic dilators alone is sufficient for most D&Es at 20-24 weeks' gestation. Dilapan-S® dilators require a shorter time to achieve maximum dilation, may be more effective than laminaria and may increase the likelihood of success on the first D&E attempt. The use of adjunctive mifepristone administered one-day pre-operatively at the time of osmotic dilator placement, should be considered because evidence demonstrates that it makes D&E subjectively easier at 20-24 weeks without increasing side effects. While older studies suggest that two-days of serial osmotic dilators provide greater dilation than one day of dilators, adjunctive mifepristone may be comparable to a second day of dilators. Adjunctive misoprostol administered on the day of D&E does not appear to affect initial cervical dilation and procedure time and compared with mifepristone is associated with more side effects, such as pain and nausea. Using overnight mifepristone and same-day misoprostol without osmotic dilators at 20-24 weeks' gestation lengthens D&E procedure time and appears to increase immediate complications, at least among less experienced providers. Some evidence shows the feasibility of same-day cervical preparation before D&E at 20-24 weeks using Dilapan-S® with adjunctive misoprostol or serial repeat dosing of misoprostol, but same-day preparation should be limited to providers with significant experience with these regimens. The Society of Family Planning recommends preoperative cervical preparation before D&E at 20-24 weeks' gestation. Further studies are needed to clarify the best means of preparing the cervix in order to minimize abortion complications and improve outcomes in this gestational range.

SMFM Special Statement: Operative vaginal delivery: checklists for performance and documentation

The frequency of operative vaginal delivery has been declining, even though it can be an attractive alternative to cesarean delivery in selected cases. Performance of operative vaginal delivery required consideration of many indications, contraindications, and prerequisites. Optimal documentation of operative vaginal delivery requires the recording of several specific elements that are unique to forceps or vacuum delivery. A cognitive aid such as a checklist is well suited to this situation in which there are numerous elements to consider, a low frequency of performance, and teams with variable expertise. We propose 2 checklists to help ensure that all relevant elements are considered for every operative vaginal delivery: (1) a checklist for preparation and performance of the procedure and (2) a checklist for documentation. We suggest practical tips to help facilities adapt these checklists to their own circumstances and implement them on their units.

Maternal position in the second stage of labour for women with epidural anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia in labour prolongs the second stage and increases instrumental delivery. It has been suggested that a more upright maternal position during all or part of the second stage may counteract these adverse effects. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different birthing positions (upright or recumbent) during the second stage of labour, on maternal and fetal outcomes for women with epidural analgesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (5 June 2018), and the reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials including pregnant women (primigravidae or multigravidae) in the second stage of induced or spontaneous labour receiving epidural analgesia of any kind. Cluster-randomised controlled trials would have been eligible for inclusion but we found none. Studies published in abstract form only were also eligible.We assumed the experimental intervention to be maternal use of any upright position during the second stage of labour, compared with the control condition of remaining in any recumbent position.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed risks of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors to obtain missing data. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.We carried out a planned sensitivity analysis of the three studies with low risks of bias for allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data reporting, and further excluded one study with a co-intervention (this was not prespecified).

MAIN RESULTS

We include eight randomised controlled trials, involving 4464 women, comparing upright positions versus recumbent positions in this update. Five were conducted in the UK, one in France and two in Spain.The largest UK trial accounted for three-quarters of all review participants, and we judged it to have low risk of bias. We assessed two other trials as being at low risk of selection and attrition bias. We rated four studies at unclear or high risk of bias for both selection and attrition bias and one study as high risk of bias due to a co-intervention. The trials varied in their comparators, with five studies comparing different positions (upright and recumbent), two comparing ambulation with (recumbent) non-ambulation, and one study comparing postural changes guided by a physiotherapist to a recumbent position.Overall, there may be little or no difference between upright and recumbent positions for our combined primary outcome of operative birth (caesarean or instrumental vaginal): average risk ratio (RR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.07; 8 trials, 4316 women; I² = 78%; low-quality evidence. It is uncertain whether the upright position has any impact on caesarean section (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.46; 8 trials, 4316 women; I² = 47%; very low-quality evidence), instrumental vaginal birth (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.12; 8 trials, 4316 women; I² = 69%) and the duration of the second stage of labour (mean difference (MD) 6.00 minutes, 95% CI -37.46 to 49.46; 3 trials, 456 women; I² = 96%), because we rated the quality of the evidence as very low for these outcomes. Maternal position in the second stage of labour probably makes little or no difference to postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), (PPH requiring blood transfusion): RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.72; 1 trial, 3093 women; moderate-quality evidence. Maternal satisfaction with the overall childbirth experience was slightly lower in the upright group: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.99; 1 trial, 2373 women. Fewer babies were born with low cord pH in the upright group: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.90; 2 trials, 3159 infants; moderate-quality evidence.The results were less clear for other maternal or fetal outcomes, including trauma to the birth canal requiring suturing (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.13; 3 trials, 3266 women; I² = 46%; low-quality evidence), abnormal fetal heart patterns requiring intervention (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.32 to 8.84; 1 trial, 107 women; very low-quality evidence), or admission to neonatal intensive care unit (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.02 to 12.73; 1 trial, 66 infants; very low-quality evidence). However, the CIs around some of these estimates were wide, and we cannot rule out clinically important effects.In our sensitivity analysis of studies at low risk of bias, upright positions increase the chance of women having an operative birth: RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.20; 3 trials, 3609 women; high-quality evidence. In absolute terms, this equates to 63 more operative births per 1000 women (from 17 more to 115 more). This increase appears to be due to the increase in caesarean section in the upright group (RR 1.29; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.57; 3 trials, 3609 women; high-quality evidence), which equates to 25 more caesarean sections per 1000 women (from 4 more to 49 more). In the sensitivity analysis there was no clear impact on instrumental vaginal births: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.30; 3 trials, 3609 women; low-quality evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There may be little or no difference in operative birth between women who adopt recumbent or supine positions during the second stage of labour with an epidural analgesia. However, the studies are heterogeneous, probably related to differing study designs and interventions, differing adherence to the allocated intervention and possible selection and attrition bias. Sensitivity analysis of studies at low risk of bias indicated that recumbent positions may reduce the need for operative birth and caesarean section, without increasing instrumental delivery. Mothers may be more satisfied with their experience of childbirth by adopting a recumbent position. The studies in this review looked at left or right lateral and semi-recumbent positions. Recumbent positions such as flat on the back or lithotomy are not generally used due to the possibility of aorto-caval compression, although we acknowledge that these recumbent positions were not the focus of trials included in this review.

Position in the second stage of labour for women with epidural anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia for pain relief in labour prolongs the second stage of labour and results in more instrumental deliveries. It has been suggested that a more upright position of the mother during all or part of the second stage may counteract these adverse effects. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different birthing positions (upright and recumbent) during the second stage of labour, on important maternal and fetal outcomes for women with epidural analgesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (19 September 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials including pregnant women (either primigravidae or multigravidae) in the second stage of induced or spontaneous labour receiving epidural analgesia of any kind. Cluster-RCTs would have been eligible for inclusion in this review but none were identified. Studies published in abstract form only were eligible for inclusion.We assumed the experimental type of intervention to be the maternal use of any upright position during the second stage of labour, compared with the control intervention of the use of any recumbent position.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. We contacted study authors to try to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

Five randomised controlled trials, involving 879 women, comparing upright positions versus recumbent positions were included in this updated review. Four trials were conducted in the UK and one in France. Three of the five trials were funded by the hospital departments in which the trials were carried out. For the other three trials, funding sources were either unclear (one trial) or not reported (two trials). Each trial varied in levels of bias. We assessed all the trials as being at low or unclear risk of selection bias. None of the trials blinded women, staff or outcome assessors. One trial was poor quality, being at high risk of attrition and reporting bias. We assessed the evidence using the GRADE approach; the evidence for most outcomes was assessed as being very low quality, and evidence for one outcome was judged as moderate quality.Overall, we identified no clear difference between upright and recumbent positions on our primary outcomes of operative birth (caesarean or instrumental vaginal) (average risk ratio (RR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 1.29; five trials, 874 women; I² = 54% moderate-quality evidence), or duration of the second stage of labour measured as the randomisation-to-birth interval (average mean difference -22.98 minutes; 95% CI -99.09 to 53.13; two trials, 322 women; I² = 92%; very low-quality evidence). Nor did we identify any clear differences in any other important maternal or fetal outcome, including trauma to the birth canal requiring suturing (average RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.37; two trials; 173 women; studies = two; I² = 74%; very low-quality evidence), abnormal fetal heart patterns requiring intervention (RR 1.69; 95% CI 0.32 to 8.84; one trial; 107 women; very low-quality evidence), low cord pH (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.18 to 2.10; one trial; 66 infants; very low-quality evidence) or admission to neonatal intensive care unit (RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.02 to 12.73; one trial; 66 infants; very low-quality evidence). However, the CIs around each estimate were wide, and clinically important effects have not been ruled out. Outcomes were downgraded for study design, high heterogeneity and imprecision in effect estimates.There were no data reported on blood loss (greater than 500 mL), prolonged second stage or maternal experience and satisfaction with labour. Similarly, there were no analysable data on Apgar scores, and no data reported on the need for ventilation or for perinatal death.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data to say anything conclusive about the effect of position for the second stage of labour for women with epidural analgesia. The GRADE quality assessment of the evidence in this review ranged between moderate to low quality, with downgrading decisions based on design limitations in the studies, inconsistency, and imprecision of effect estimates.Women with an epidural should be encouraged to use whatever position they find comfortable in the second stage of labour.More studies with larger sample sizes will need to be conducted in order for solid conclusions to be made about the effect of position on labour in women with an epidural. Two studies are ongoing and we will incorporate the results into this review at a future update.Future studies should have the protocol registered, so that sample size, primary outcome, analysis plan, etc. are all clearly prespecified. The time or randomisation should be recorded, since this is the only unbiased starting time point from which the effect of position on duration of labour can be estimated. Future studies might wish to include an arm in which women were allowed to choose the position in which they felt most comfortable. Future studies should ensure that both compared positions are acceptable to women, that women can remain in them for most of the late part of labour, and report the number of women who spend time in the allocated position and the amount of time they spend in this or other positions.

Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe, and acceptable.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of any medical treatment for incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (13 May 2016) and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery, or alternative methods of medical treatment. We excluded quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies (5577 women). There were no trials specifically of miscarriage treatment after 13 weeks' gestation.Three trials involving 335 women compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; 2 studies, 150 women, random-effects; very low-quality evidence), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; 2 studies, 308 women, random-effects; low-quality evidence). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. For unplanned surgical intervention, we did not identify any difference between misoprostol and expectant care (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; 2 studies, 308 women, random-effects; low-quality evidence).Sixteen trials involving 4044 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (7 studies used oral administration, 6 studies used vaginal, 2 studies sublingual, 1 study combined vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was a slightly lower incidence of complete miscarriage with misoprostol (average RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.98; 15 studies, 3862 women, random-effects; very low-quality evidence) but with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.11; 13 studies, 3070 women, random-effects; very low-quality evidence) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 5.03, 95% CI 2.71 to 9.35; 11 studies, 2690 women, random-effects; low-quality evidence). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Nausea was more common with misoprostol (average RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.53 to 4.09; 11 studies, 3015 women, random-effects; low-quality evidence). We did not identify any difference in women's satisfaction between misoprostol and surgery (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.00; 9 studies, 3349 women, random-effects; moderate-quality evidence). More women had vomiting and diarrhoea with misoprostol compared with surgery (vomiting: average RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.85; 10 studies, 2977 women, random-effects; moderate-quality evidence; diarrhoea: average RR 4.82, 95% CI 1.09 to 21.32; 4 studies, 757 women, random-effects; moderate-quality evidence).Five trials compared different routes of administration, or doses, or both, of misoprostol. There was no clear evidence of one regimen being superior to another. Limited evidence suggests that women generally seem satisfied with their care. Long-term follow-up from one included study identified no difference in subsequent fertility between the three approaches.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that medical treatment, with misoprostol, and expectant care are both acceptable alternatives to routine surgical evacuation given the availability of health service resources to support all three approaches. Further studies, including long-term follow-up, are clearly needed to confirm these findings. There is an urgent need for studies on women who miscarry at more than 13 weeks' gestation.

[Assisted vaginal delivery]

This article is meant to be a complement to the new statement "Assisted vaginal delivery" of the Section of perinatal and fetomaternal medicine (SPFM) of the Czech Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics ČLS JEP, which is also published in this issue of Czech gynecology. The new statement has been formed as a synthesis of two previous separate statements of the SPFM "Vacuumextraction" and "Forceps delivery" and has also been updated based on new scientific knowledge. This review publication summarizes latest knowledge on vacuumextraction and forceps delivery and adds comments to certain points from the statement.

DESIGN

A review of the literature.

Techniques for assisting difficult delivery at caesarean section

BACKGROUND

Caesarean section involves making an incision in the woman's abdomen and cutting through the uterine muscle. The baby is then delivered through that incision. Difficult caesarean birth may result in injury for the infant or complications for the mother. Methods to assist with delivery include vacuum or forceps extraction or manual delivery utilising fundal pressure. Medication that relaxes the uterus (tocolytic medication) may facilitate the birth of the baby at caesarean section. Delivery of the impacted head after prolonged obstructed labour can be associated with significant maternal and neonatal complication; to facilitate delivery of the head the surgeon may utilise either reverse breech extraction or head pushing.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the use of tocolysis (routine or selective use) with no use of tocolysis or placebo and to compare different extraction methods at the time of caesarean section for outcomes of infant birth trauma, maternal complications (particularly postpartum haemorrhage requiring blood transfusion), and long-term measures of infant and childhood morbidity.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 September 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All published, unpublished, and ongoing randomised controlled trials comparing the use of tocolytic agents (routine or selective) at caesarean section versus no use of tocolytic or placebo at caesarean section to facilitate the birth of the baby. Use of instrument versus manual delivery to facilitate birth of the baby. Reverse breech extraction versus head pushing to facilitate delivery of the deeply impacted fetal head.

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

Seven randomised controlled trials, involving 582 women undergoing caesarean section were included in this review. The risk of bias of included trials was variable, with some trials not adequately describing allocation or randomisation.Three comparisons were included. 1. Tocolysis versus no tocolysisA single randomised trial involving 97 women was identified and included in the review. Birth trauma was not reported. There were no cases of any maternal side-effect reported in either the nitroglycerin or the placebo group. No other maternal and infant health outcomes were reported. 2. Reverse breech extraction versus head push for the deeply impacted head at full dilation at caesarean section Four randomised trials involving 357 women were identified and included in the review. The primary outcome of birth trauma was reported by three trials and there was no difference between reverse breech extraction and head push for this rare outcome (three studies, 239 women, risk ratio (RR) 1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 5.73). Secondary outcomes including endometritis rate (three studies, 285 women, average RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.05, Tau I² = 0.22, I² = 56%), extension of uterine incision (four studies, 357 women, average RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.40), mean blood loss (three studies, 298 women, mean difference (MD) -294.92, 95% CI -493.25 to -96.59; I² = 98%) and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU)/special care nursery (SCN) admission (two studies, 226 babies, average RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.22, Tau I² = 0.27, I² = 74%) were decreased with reverse breech extraction. No differences were observed between groups for many of the other secondary outcomes reported (blood loss > 500 mL; blood transfusion; wound infection; mean hospital stay; average Apgar score).There was significant heterogeneity between the trials for the outcomes mean blood loss, operative time and mean hospital stay, making comparison difficult. However the operation duration was significantly shorter for reverse breech extraction, which may correspond with ease of delivery and therefore, the amount of tissue trauma and therefore, significantly less blood loss. Given the heterogeneity, we cannot define the amount of difference in blood loss, operative time or hospital stay however. 3. Instrument (vacuum or forceps) versus manual extraction at elective caesarean section Two randomised trials involving 128 women were identified and included in the review. Only one trial reported maternal and infant health outcomes as prespecified in this review. This trial reported birth trauma as an outcome but there were no instances of birth trauma in either comparison group. There were no differences found in mean fall in haemoglobin (Hb) between groups (one study, 44 women, MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.59), or in uterine incision extension (one study, 44 women, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.73).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently insufficient information available from randomised trials to support or refute the routine or selective use of tocolytic agents or instrument to facilitate infant birth at the time of difficult caesarean section. There is limited evidence that reverse breech extraction may improve maternal and fetal outcomes, though there was no difference in primary outcome of infant birth trauma. Further randomised controlled trials are needed to answer these questions.

Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes by Attempted Mode of Operative Delivery From a Low Station in the Second Stage of Labor

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes by attempted mode of operative delivery from a low station in the second stage of labor.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 2,518 women carrying singleton fetuses at 37 weeks of gestation or greater who underwent attempted forceps-assisted delivery, attempted vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery, or cesarean delivery from a low station in the second stage of labor. Primary outcomes were stratified by parity and included a maternal adverse outcome composite (postpartum hemorrhage, transfusion, endometritis, peripartum hysterectomy, or intensive care unit admission) and a neonatal adverse outcome composite (5-minute Apgar score less than 4, respiratory morbidity, neonatal intensive care unit admission, shoulder dystocia, birth trauma, or sepsis).

RESULTS

In nulliparous patients, the maternal adverse composite was not significantly different between women who underwent attempted forceps (12.1% compared with 10.8%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-1.34) or vacuum (8.3% compared with 10.8%, adjusted OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.40-1.16) delivery compared with cesarean delivery. Among parous women, the maternal adverse composite was not significantly different with attempted forceps (10.7% compared with 12.5%, adjusted OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.09-1.71) or vacuum (11.3% compared with 12.5%, adjusted OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.11-1.72) compared with cesarean delivery. Compared with neonates delivered by cesarean, the neonatal adverse composite was significantly lower among neonates born to nulliparous women who underwent attempted forceps (9.4% compared with 16.7%, adjusted OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27-0.72) but not among those who underwent vacuum delivery (11.9% compared with 16.7%, adjusted OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.44-1.04). Among parous women, the neonatal adverse composite was not significantly different after attempted forceps (4.1% compared with 12.5%, adjusted OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.06-1.35) or vacuum (12.5% compared with 12.5%, adjusted OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.28-3.87) compared with cesarean delivery.

CONCLUSION

A trial of forceps delivery from a low station compared with cesarean delivery was associated with decreased neonatal morbidity among neonates born to nulliparous women.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Prevalence of levator ani muscle injury and health-related quality of life in primiparous Chinese women after instrumental delivery

OBJECTIVES

Levator ani muscle (LAM) injury is common after first vaginal delivery, and a higher incidence is associated with instrumental delivery. This study was conducted to compare the incidence of LAM injury after forceps or ventouse extraction in primiparous Chinese women, and to study their subsequent health-related quality of life.

METHODS

This prospective observational study was conducted between 1 September 2011 and 31 May 2012 in a tertiary obstetric unit. All eligible primiparous women who had undergone instrumental delivery were recruited 1 to 3 days following delivery. The subjects completed the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory questionnaire and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire, and translabial ultrasound was performed 8 weeks' postpartum to determine whether the subjects had suffered LAM injury.

RESULTS

Among the 289 women who completed the study, 247 (85.5%) had ventouse extraction and 42 (14.5%) had forceps delivery. Subsequent translabial ultrasound identified a total of 58 women with LAM injury. The prevalence of LAM injury after ventouse extraction and forceps delivery was 16.6% (95% CI, 12.0-21.2%) (41/247) and 40.5% (95% CI, 25.6-55.4%) (17/42), respectively (P = 0.001). Forceps delivery was identified as a risk factor for LAM injury, with an odds ratio of 3.54. No statistically significant differences were observed between the quality of life in women who underwent ventouse extraction and those with forceps delivery or between the quality of life in women with a unilateral or bilateral LAM injury.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort of primiparous Chinese women, 20.1% (58/289) had LAM injury after instrumental delivery, and forceps delivery was identified as the only risk factor.

Management of fetal malposition in the second stage of labor: a propensity score analysis

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the factors associated with selection of rotational instrumental vs cesarean delivery to manage persistent fetal malposition, and to assess differences in adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes following delivery by rotational instruments vs cesarean delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study over a 5-year period in a tertiary United Kingdom obstetrics center. In all, 868 women with vertex-presenting, single, liveborn infants at term with persistent malposition in the second stage of labor were included. Propensity score stratification was used to control for selection bias: the possibility that obstetricians may systematically select more difficult cases for cesarean delivery. Linear and logistic regression models were used to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes for delivery by rotational forceps or ventouse vs cesarean delivery, adjusting for propensity scores.

RESULTS

Increased likelihood of rotational instrumental delivery was associated with lower maternal age (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; P < .01), lower body mass index (OR, 0.94; P < .001), lower birthweight (OR, 0.95; P < .01), no evidence of fetal compromise at the time of delivery (OR, 0.31; P < .001), delivery during the daytime (OR, 1.45; P < .05), and delivery by a more experienced obstetrician (OR, 7.21; P < .001). Following propensity score stratification, there was no difference by delivery method in the rates of delayed neonatal respiration, reported critical incidents, or low fetal arterial pH. Maternal blood loss was higher in the cesarean group (295.8 ± 48 mL, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Rotational instrumental delivery is often regarded as unsafe. However, we find that neonatal outcomes are no worse once selection bias is accounted for, and that the likelihood of severe obstetric hemorrhage is reduced. More widespread training of obstetricians in rotational instrumental delivery should be considered, particularly in light of rising cesarean delivery rates.

Controlled cord traction for the third stage of labour

BACKGROUND

Active management of the third stage of labour (AMTSL) consists of a group of interventions, including administration of a prophylactic uterotonic (at at or after delivery of the baby), baby, cord clamping and cutting, controlled cord traction (CCT) to deliver the placenta, and uterine massage. Recent recommendations are to delay cord clamping until the caregiver is ready to initiate CCT. The package of AMTSL reduces the risk of postpartum haemorrhage, (PPH), as does one component, routine use of uterotonics. The contribution, if any, of CCT needs to be quantified, as it is uncomfortable, and women may prefer a 'hands-off' approach. In addition its implementation has resource implications in terms of training of healthcare providers.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of controlled cord traction during the third stage of labour, either with or without conventional active management.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (29 January 2014), PubMed (1966 to 29 January 2014), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing planned CCT versus no planned CCT in women giving birth vaginally.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data using a standard data extraction form.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three methodologically sound trials with data on 199, 4058 and 23,616 women respectively. Blinding was not possible, but bias could be limited by the fact that blood loss was measured objectively.There was no difference in the risk of blood loss ≥ 1000 mL (three trials, 27,454 women; risk ratio (RR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.08). Manual removal of the placenta was reduced with CCT (two trials, 27,665 women; RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.83). In the World Health Organization (WHO) trial the reduction in manual removal occurred mainly in sites where ergometrine was used routinely in the third stage of labour. The non-prespecified analysis excluding sites routinely using ergometrine for management of the third stage of labour found no difference in the risk of manual removal of the placenta in the WHO trial (one trial, 23,010 women; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.46). The policy of restricting the third stage of labour to 30 minutes (4057 women; RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.90) may have had an effect in the French study.Among the secondary outcomes, there were reductions in blood loss ≥ 500 mL (three trials, 27,454 women; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.99), mean blood loss (two trials, 27,255 women; mean difference (MD) -10.85 mL, 95% CI -16.73 to -4.98), and duration of the third stage of labour (two trials, 27,360 women; standardised MD -0.57, -0.59 to -0.54). There were no clear differences in use of additional uterotonics (three trials, 27,829 women; average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.02), blood transfusion, maternal death/severe morbidity, operative procedures nor maternal satisfaction. Maternal pain (non-prespecified) was reduced in one trial (3760 women; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.99).The following secondary outcomes were not reported upon in any of the trials: retained placenta for more than 60 minutes or as defined by trial author; maternal haemoglobin less than 9 g/dL at 24 to 48 hours post-delivery or blood transfusion; organ failure; intensive care unit admission; caregiver satisfaction; cost-effectiveness; evacuation of retained products; or infection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CCT has the advantage of reducing the risk of manual removal of the placenta in some circumstances, and evidence suggests that CCT can be routinely offered during the third stage of labour, provided the birth attendant has the necessary skills. CCT should remain a core competence of skilled birth attendants. However, the limited benefits of CCT in terms of severe PPH would not justify the major investment which would be needed to provide training in CCT skills for birth attendants who do not have formal training. Women who prefer a less interventional approach to management of the third stage of labour can be reassured that when a uterotonic agent is used, routine use of CCT can be omitted from the 'active management' package without increased risk of severe PPH, but that the risk of manual removal of the placenta may be increased.Research gaps include the use of CCT in the absence of a uterotonic, and the place of uterine massage in the management of the third stage of labour.

Feasibility and safety study of a new device (Odón device) for assisted vaginal deliveries: study protocol

BACKGROUND

Intrapartum complications are responsible for approximately half of all maternal deaths, and two million stillbirth and neonatal deaths per year. Prolonged second stage of labour is associated with potentially fatal maternal complications such as haemorrhage and infection and it is a major cause of stillbirth and newborn morbidity and mortality. Currently, the three main options for managing prolonged second stage of labour are forceps, vacuum extractor and caesarean section. All three clinical practices require relatively expensive equipment (e.g., a surgical theatre for caesarean section) and/or highly trained staff which are often not available in low resource settings. The specific aim of the proposed study is to test the safety and feasibility of a new device (Odón device) to effectively deliver the fetus during prolonged second stage of labour. The Odón device is a low-cost technological innovation to facilitate operative vaginal delivery and designed to minimize trauma to the mother and baby. These features combined make it a potentially revolutionary development in obstetrics, particularly for improving intrapartum care and reducing maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality in low resource settings.

METHODS/DESIGN

This will be a hospital-based, multicenter prospective phase 1 cohort study with no control group. Delivery with the Odón device will be attempted under normal labour and non-emergency conditions on all the women enrolled in the study. One-hundred and thirty pregnant women will be recruited in tertiary care facilities in Argentina. Safety will be assessed by examining maternal and infant outcomes until discharge. Feasibility will be evaluated by observing successful expulsion of the fetal head after one-time application of the device under standardized conditions (full cervical dilation, anterior presentation, +2 station, normal fetal heart rate).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR). Identifier: ACTRN12613000141741.

Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe and acceptable.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of any medical treatment for incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2012) and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery or alternative methods of medical treatment. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty studies (4208 women) were included. There were no trials specifically of miscarriage treatment after 13 weeks' gestation.Three trials involving 335 women compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no statistically significant difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; two studies, 150 women, random-effects), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; two studies, 308 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'.Twelve studies involving 2894 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (six studies used oral administration, four studies used vaginal, one study sub-lingual, one study combined vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was a slightly lower incidence of complete miscarriage with misoprostol (average RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, 11 studies, 2493 women, random-effects) but with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.13; 11 studies, 2654 women, random-effects) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 5.82, 95% CI 2.93 to 11.56; nine studies, 2274 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Nausea was more common with misoprostol (average RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.03; nine studies, 2179 women, random-effects).Five trials compared different routes of administration and/or doses of misoprostol. There was no clear evidence of one regimen being superior to another. Limited evidence suggests that women generally seem satisfied with their care. Long-term follow-up from one included study identified no difference in subsequent fertility between the three approaches.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that medical treatment, with misoprostol, and expectant care are both acceptable alternatives to routine surgical evacuation given the availability of health service resources to support all three approaches. Women experiencing miscarriage at less than 13 weeks should be offered an informed choice. Future studies should include long-term follow-up.

Position in the second stage of labour for women with epidural anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Epidural analgesia for pain relief in labour prolongs the second stage of labour and results in more instrumental deliveries. It has been suggested that a more upright position of the mother during all or part of the second stage may counteract these adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different birthing positions (upright versus recumbent) during the second stage of labour, on important maternal and fetal outcomes for women with epidural analgesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2012) and reference lists of retrieved studies

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised trials including pregnant women (either primigravidae or multigravidae) in the second stage of induced or spontaneous labour receiving epidural analgesia of any kind.We assumed the experimental type of intervention to be the maternal use of any upright position during the second stage of labour, compared with the control intervention of the use of any recumbent position.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. We contacted authors to try to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

Five randomised controlled trials, involving 879 women, were included in the review.Overall, we identified no statistically significant difference between upright and recumbent positions on our primary outcomes of operative birth (caesarean or instrumental vaginal) (average risk ratio (RR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 1.29; five trials, 874 women), or duration of the second stage of labour measured as the randomisation to birth interval (average mean difference -22.98 minutes; 95% CI -99.09 to 53.13; two trials, 322 women). Nor did we identify any clear differences in the incidence of instrumental birth or caesarean section separately, nor in any other important maternal or fetal outcome, including trauma to the birth canal requiring suturing, operative birth for fetal distress, low cord pH or admission to neonatal intensive care unit. However, the CIs around each estimate were wide, and clinically important effects have not been ruled out.There were no data reported on excess blood loss, prolonged second stage or maternal experience and satisfaction with labour. Similarly, there were no analysable data on Apgar scores, and no data reported on the need for ventilation or for perinatal death.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data to say anything conclusive about the effect of position for the second stage of labour for women with epidural analgesia. Women with an epidural should be encouraged to use whatever position they find comfortable in the second stage of labour. Future research should involve large trials of positions that women can maintain and predefined endpoints. One large trial is ongoing.

Trial of instrumental delivery in theatre versus immediate caesarean section for anticipated difficult assisted births

BACKGROUND

The majority of women have spontaneous vaginal births, but some women need assistance in the second stage with delivery of the baby, using either the obstetric forceps or vacuum extraction. Rates of instrumental vaginal delivery range from 5% to 20% of all births in industrialised countries. The majority of instrumental vaginal deliveries are conducted in the delivery room, but in a small proportion (2% to 5%), a trial of instrumental vaginal delivery is conducted in theatre with preparations made for proceeding to caesarean section.

OBJECTIVES

To determine differences in maternal and neonatal morbidity between women who, due to anticipated difficulty, have trial of instrumental vaginal delivery in theatre and those who have immediate caesarean section for failure to progress in the second stage.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (28 June 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing trial of instrumental vaginal delivery (vacuum extraction or forceps) in operating theatre to immediate caesarean section for women with failure to progress in the second stage (active second stage more than 60 minutes in primigravidae).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We identified no studies meeting our inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies were included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no current evidence from randomised trials to influence practice.

[Trends in vaginal assisted deliveries in the Moravian-Silesian region between the years 2002-2011]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze trends in vaginal assisted deliveries between 2002-2011 in the Moravian-Silesian region, Czech Republic.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Obstetric facilities in the Moravian-Silesian region, Czech Republic.

METHODS

Analysis of data on vaginal assisted deliveries in the obstetric facilities in the Moravian-Silesian region, Czech Republic, between the years 2002-2011.

RESULTS

During the analyzed period the use of vacuum extraction rose from 0.11% to 2.44% of all deliveries and the use of forceps declined from 1.54% to 0.24% of all deliveries. The overall frequency of vaginal assisted deliveries increased from 1.65% to 2.87%. The frequency of caesarean section increased from 16% to 24.5%.

CONCLUSION

A fundamental change in the trends of vaginal assisted deliveries occurred in the Moravian-Silesian region between 2002 to 2011. There was a significant reduction in the use of forceps and the rise in the use of vacuum extraction with an overall increase in vaginal assisted deliveries. In comparison with the results of the rest of the Czech Republic, the trends in the Moravian-Silesian region are more pronounced. During the analysed period a significant rise of the cesarean section deliveries occurred.

Outcomes associated with introduction of a shoulder dystocia protocol

The objective of this study was to assess outcomes that are associated with the implementation of a shoulder dystocia protocol that is focused on team response. We identified women who had a shoulder dystocia during 3 time periods: 6 months before (period A), 6 months during (period B), and 6 months after (period C) the institution of a shoulder dystocia protocol. Documentation and health outcomes were compared among the time periods. During the study period, 254 women (77, 100, and 77 in periods A, B, and C, respectively) had a shoulder dystocia. There were no differences among study periods in patient characteristics. However, complete and consistent documentation increased (14% to 50% to 92%; P < .001), and brachial plexus palsy that was diagnosed at delivery (10.1% to 4.0% to 2.6%; P = .03) and at neonatal discharge (7.6% to 3.0% to 1.3%; P = .04) declined.

Four-dimensional sonographic evaluation of avulsion of the levator ani according to delivery mode

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency of avulsion of the levator ani muscle in primiparous women according to delivery mode, using introital four-dimensional ultrasonography.

METHODS

We performed a prospective observational study at a tertiary obstetric unit. One hundred and eighty primiparous women were included and divided into three groups: normal vaginal delivery without episiotomy, forceps delivery and Cesarean section groups. Between 40 and 120 days after delivery, four-dimensional ultrasonography was performed in order to evaluate the integrity of the levator ani muscle. The operator was blinded to all clinical data and was not aware of delivery mode. The influence of other variables associated with delivery such as birth weight, body mass index, maternal age and use of epidural anesthesia was also studied.

RESULTS

Avulsion of the puborectalis component of the levator ani muscle was detected on ultrasonography in 61.7% of women who had undergone a forceps delivery, compared with 13.3% of those who had had a normal vaginal delivery and 0% of those who had had a Cesarean section. Bilateral avulsion was observed in 12/60 (20.0%) of the forceps group and in 2/60 (3.3%) of the normal vaginal delivery group (P < 0.001). Other variables did not seem to influence prevalence.

CONCLUSIONS

Forceps delivery is associated with an increased rate of avulsion of the puborectalis component of the levator ani muscle. The effect of forceps use is independent of other delivery-related variables.

[Indications for vaginal delivery with forceps application]

The aim of the study was to establish indications for operative vaginal delivery by extraction of the fetus with forceps in modern obstetrics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retro- and prospective study which includes 672 forceps deliveries in the period of 1994-2008 in Maternity hospital Sofia. Simpson and Kielland were used for extractions subject to appropriate indications and conditions, regardless of the gestational week of pregnancy.

RESULTS

The most frequent indication for forceps application is fetal asphyxia (78.1%) and considering the frequency for 15 years it is the permanent, leading indication for forceps in modern obstetrics. Arrest of the head in the same plane of the pelvis was the indication in 23.6% of the cases it varies and is rarely primary through the 15 year period. Ineffective uterine contractions and/or pushes (16.7%) tends to decrease its frequency. Avoiding maternal efforts in the second stage of labor (8.5%) and in 50% of the cases was indicated for women with cardiovascular diseases. Malpositions (7.7%) increases through the years probably secondary to epidural analgesia. Indication preeclampsia-eclampsia is described in 1.3% of cases, followed by genital bleeding by 1.9% and prolapse of the umbilical cord by 0.6% and they are more incidentally reasons for application of forceps.

CONCLUSION

Asphyxia of the fetus is the most common and a leading indication for extraction of the fetus with forceps. Ineffective uterine contractions and the arrest of the head in the same plane of the pelvis are consistent in their occurrence and lead to prolonged labor. In certain critical conditions (genital bleeding, prolapse of the umbilical cord and eclampsia) extraction of the fetus with forceps remains the only way for fast vaginal delivery.

Cervical preparation for second trimester dilation and evacuation

BACKGROUND

Abortion during the second trimester of pregnancy accounts for 10-15% of abortions performed worldwide. Dilation and evacuation (D&E) is the preferred method of second-trimester abortion in most parts of the developed world. Cervical preparation is recommended for dilation and curettage (D&C) after 12 weeks gestation and is standard practice for D&E beyond 14 weeks gestation. Prostaglandins, osmotic dilators, and Foley balloon catheters have been used and studied as cervical preparation prior to second-trimester D&E. However, no consensus exists as to which cervical preparation method is superior with regards to safety, procedure time, need for additional dilation, ability to perform the procedure, or patient and provider acceptability. Despite the fact that the advent of osmotic dilation has improved the safety of the D&E procedure during the second trimester, it is unclear whether a certain type of osmotic dilator is superior to another or whether osmotic dilation with adjuvant prostaglandin is superior to osmotic dilation alone or to prostaglandins alone.

OBJECTIVES

This review evaluates cervical preparation methods for second-trimester surgical abortion with respect to differences in procedure time, dilation achieved, need for additional dilation, complications, ability to complete the procedure, patient pain scores, and patient and provider acceptability and satisfaction.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched for trials of cervical preparation prior to second-trimester D&E.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials that compared osmotic, mechanical, antiprogesterone, prostaglandin, or other medical agents of cervical preparation for second-trimester surgical abortion from 14-24 weeks of gestation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were abstracted by two authors and data entry was verified by a third author. Mean difference and Peto Odds Ratio were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Osmotic dilators were found to be superior to prostaglandins with respect to cervical dilation throughout the second trimester and with respect to procedure time within the early second trimester. Addition of prostaglandins to osmotic dilators was not found to increase cervical dilation, except after 19 weeks gestation, however, no impact was seen on procedure time. Addition of Mifepristone to misoprostol was found to improve cervical dilation, yet increase procedure time and frequency of pre-procedural expulsions. Two-day cervical preparation was found to produce greater cervical preparation than one-day, but had no impact on procedure time. Serious complication rates or ability to complete the procedure did not differ significantly between any of the preparation methods reviewed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Cervical preparation with osmotic dilators and/or misoprostol before second-trimester D&E is safe and effective. Osmotic dilators appear to provide superior cervical dilation when compared to prostaglandins alone or when combined with prostaglandins, however this difference in cervical dilation does not appear to result in differences in procedure time or complication rates. There does not appear to be clear clinical benefit from two days of cervical preparation compared to one-day prior to second-trimester D&E below 19 weeks gestational duration. Mifepristone plus misoprostol was associated with high rates of pre-procedural expulsions and does not appear to be a useful method of cervical preparation before second-trimester dilation and evacuation. Same-day procedures appear to be a safe and reasonable option in the early second trimester, however, more research is needed to assess the effectiveness and safety of same-day procedures in the later second trimester.

How long does it take to perform an operative vaginal delivery?

We set out to see how long it takes to achieve an operative vaginal delivery in normal practice. This was a prospective survey, conducted in a major and well-staffed British maternity unit over 1 month. Sixty-two assisted vaginal deliveries occurred in the month of the study. Thirteen data collection sheets were spoiled or could not be confirmed and were discarded before analysis. Therefore the remaining data are based on 49 deliveries. The main outcome measure was the time interval between the decision to assist the vaginal delivery and the delivery. Fifty per cent of babies were delivered within 18 minutes once the decision to act had been made (range 6-85 minutes). If the primary indication for delivery was an abnormal CTG the median time was 16 minutes (mean 20 minutes). Any legal claim based on the assumption that a reasonably competent obstetrician should deliver a baby within 15 minutes cannot be supported by scientific data.

Which approach for first trimester miscarriage?

Around 15% of all known pregnancies miscarry during the first trimester. Historically, first trimester miscarriage was managed surgically to remove all retained products of conception, with the aim of minimising the likelihood of blood loss and infection from retained tissue. Nowadays, medical management (use of drugs such as mifepristone and misoprostol) and expectant management (i.e. allowing the miscarriage to conclude naturally) have become alternatives to a surgical procedure for managing women with early miscarriage. Here, we review the evidence on these three methods to assess the benefits and disadvantages of each.

[Obstetric anaesthesia for instrumental vaginal delivery]

The aim of the anaesthesia for instrumental delivery is to provide optimal operation conditions for the obstetrician, appropriate maternal comfort, altogether with safety for the mother and her foetus. The type and location for this intervention are chosen individually for each case according to the indication, the risk of caesarean section and the local specificities. The general safety recommendations for obstetric anaesthesia apply in every case. Since an epidural analgesia is often already working, this type of anaesthesia is the most frequently used for the extractions. A spinal anaesthesia is a logical choice where an epidural in sot yet working. The pudendal block is a second line choice and the general anaesthesia remains as the last alternative in acute emergencies, in cases of failed regional anaesthesia or when the mother refuses any other anaesthesia despite proper information or proves unable to cooperate.

Trial of instrumental delivery in theatre versus immediate caesarean section for anticipated difficult assisted births

BACKGROUND

The majority of women have spontaneous vaginal births, but some women need assistance in the second stage with delivery of the baby, using either the obstetric forceps or vacuum extraction. Rates of instrumental vaginal delivery range from 5% to 20% of all births in industrialised countries. The majority of instrumental vaginal deliveries are conducted in the delivery room, but in a small proportion (2% to 5%), a trial of instrumental vaginal delivery is conducted in theatre with preparations made for proceeding to caesarean section.

OBJECTIVES

To determine differences in maternal and neonatal morbidity between women who, due to anticipated difficulty, have trial of instrumental vaginal delivery in theatre and those who have immediate caesarean section for failure to progress in the second stage.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (May 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing trial of instrumental vaginal delivery (vacuum extraction or forceps) in operating theatre to immediate caesarean section for women with failure to progress in the second stage (active second stage more than 60 minutes in primigravidae).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We identified no studies meeting our inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

No studies were included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no current evidence from randomised trials to influence practice.

[Eye disease and mode of delivery]

Many ophthalmologists and obstetricians recommend either an assisted vaginal delivery with forceps or vacuum extraction or a Caesarean section in cases of pre-existing eye diseases such as severe myopia, retinal detachment, diabetic retinopathy, or glaucoma. These recommendations, however, are not evidence-based. None of the published trials have reported any retinal changes after vaginal delivery. In general, eye disease is not an indication for an instrumental or operative delivery provided that regular eye examinations (once each trimester) have been performed.

Neonatal subgaleal hemorrhage

Subgaleal hemorrhages, although infrequent in the past, are becoming more common with the increased use of vacuum extraction. Bleeding into the large subgaleal space can quickly lead to hypovolemic shock, which can be fatal. Understanding of anatomy, pathophysiology, risk factors, differential diagnosis, and management will assist in early recognition and care of the infant with a subgaleal hemorrhage.

On the Mechanical Aspects of Shoulder Dystocia and Birth Injury

This article presents objective evidence about shoulder dystocia and its associated mechanical injuries, namely clavicle fractures, and brachial plexus injuries. Specifically, the review focuses on the mechanical response of the fetus to forces applied to it or its anatomic components, including possible force thresholds for injury. This is followed by presenting the medical and engineering literature on the mechanical aspects of shoulder dystocia with emphasis on kinematics, the forces associated with labor and with traction forces associated with delivery. Finally, the paper discusses the mechanical characteristics of maternal and fetal maneuvers for shoulder dystocia and demonstrates how shoulder dystocia models can be used to train clinicians in the performance of maneuvers that stress the fetus the least. From a mechanical point of view, there are obstetric methods and training that can be employed to reduce the stresses induced by the fetus while alleviating shoulder dystocia, thereby reducing, but not eliminating, the risk of mechanical injury.

Predictors of failed operative vaginal delivery: a single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify factors that predict operative vaginal delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study was conducted that included all women who underwent a trial of operative vaginal delivery between 1993 and 2006 at a major tertiary center.

RESULTS

Operative vaginal delivery was attempted in 5120 of 83,351 deliveries (6.1%): 4299 vacuum extractions (84.0%) and 821 forceps deliveries (16.0%). Failures occurred in 8.6% of trials, more often with vacuum extraction (10.0% vs 1.3%; P < .001). Most vacuum extraction failures (72.6%) were followed by a trial of forceps delivery, which failed in 3.5% of cases. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, the use of forceps (vs vacuum; odds ratio [OR], 0.4; 95%CI, 0.2-0.7) and administration of analgesia (epidural: OR, 0.4 [95% CI, 0.2-0.7]; intravenous opiates: OR, 0.2 [95%CI, 0.1-0.6]) were associated with a lower risk of failure, persistent occiput posterior position (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4-3.5) and birthweight >4000 g (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.6-4.9), with a higher risk.

CONCLUSION

Fetal weight and head position should be evaluated carefully before operative vaginal delivery, and the use of analgesia should be encouraged.

Towards safe practice in instrumental vaginal delivery

Approximately one in ten deliveries in the Western world is an instrumental vaginal delivery. Like other surgical operations, instrumental vaginal delivery has its complications, and the operator is obliged to critically appraise the indication for the procedure and the background risk factors, and communicate effectively with the woman. Also, it calls for team work. The safe approach to instrumental delivery should therefore be similar to that adopted for other surgical operations in terms of preoperative assessment, intraoperative precautions and postoperative care. Safe practice in instrumental delivery addresses the various types of error that may occur, and places a strong premium on operator skills, competence, and familiarity with the particular instrument. This chapter reviews good practice in the conduct of instrumental delivery, highlights what could go wrong, and outlines interventions that could reduce the incidence of harm. Issues relating to communication and consent as well as training and documentation are discussed. Indications for abandonment are outlined, and the importance of situational awareness is emphasized. Safe practice tips are amply provided.

Design of a New Instrumented Forceps: Application to Safe Obstetrical Forceps Blade Placement

Today, medical simulators are increasingly gaining appeal in clinical settings. In obstetrics childbirth simulators provide a training and research tool for comparing various techniques that use obstetrical instruments or validating new methods. Especially in the case of difficult deliveries, the use of obstetrical instruments-such as forceps, spatulas, and vacuum extractors-has become essential. However, such instruments increase the risk of injury to both the mother and fetus. Only clinical experience acquired in the delivery room enables health professionals to reduce this risk. In this context, we have developed, in collaboration with researchers and physicians, a new type of instrumented forceps that offers new solutions for training obstetricians in the safe performance of forceps deliveries. This paper focuses on the design of this instrumented forceps, coupled with the BirthSIM simulator. This instrumented forceps allows to study its displacement inside the maternal pelvis. Methods for analyzing the operator repeatability and to compare forceps blade placements to a reference one are developed. The results highlight the need of teaching tools to adequately train novice obstetricians.

[Can we still perform instrumental rotations using Thierry's spatula? Preliminary study among primiparous]

OBJECTIVES

To study immediate perineal and neonatal outcomes after instrumental rotational performed with Thierry's spatula among primiparous, and compare subsequent perineal tear with occiput posterior position delivery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was performed from December 2005 to June 2006 at Paule-de-Viguier hospital (Toulouse university hospital) including all persistent occiput posterior vaginal deliveries among primiparous (49 patients). Mode of delivery was: 1) seven patients with spontaneous occiput anterior vaginal delivery (14.3%); 2) seven patients with rotational extraction using spatula with occiput anterior delivery (30.6%); 3) twenty-seven patients with instrumental extraction and occiput posterior delivery (55.1%). Maternal and fetal parameters were studied prospectively.

RESULTS

Spatula was performed for failure of progress in 71.4% of cases (n=30) and for no reassuring fetal status in 28.6% of cases (n=12). In "rotational group", only one perineal tear was observed (Third degree) (6.6%) versus seven in "occiput posterior extraction group" (26%) with three severe perineal lacerations. Neonatal superficial lesions are frequent (26,6% after rotation versus 11.6% after occiput posterior extraction). None severe traumatic tears were observed.

CONCLUSION

Instrumental rotation using Thierry's spatula seems to be less deleterious for maternal perineum than occiput posterior extraction, without increasing neonatal complications. Theses preliminary results have to be confirmed by more important prospective works.

The impact of a trial of instrumental delivery in theatre on neonatal outcome

OBJECTIVE

To observe the effect of a trial of instrumental delivery in theatre on outcome for mother and baby.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study.

METHODS

Relevant maternal and neonatal data were collected for all instrumental deliveries of singleton viable pregnancies delivered over a three month period.

POPULATION

Two hundred and twenty nine consecutive deliveries conducted by ventouse or forceps because of fetal distress or dystocia.

SETTING

The maternity unit of a teaching hospital delivering around 6000 women annually.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The decision-to-delivery intervals (DDI), mode of delivery and neonatal condition at birth.

RESULTS

Sixty (26%) deliveries were managed as a trial in theatre, 46 (77%) because of prolonged second stage, with malposition being a factor in 39, and 14 (23%) because of fetal distress. The mean +/- SD DDI for these 60 deliveries was 59.2 +/- 20.4 minutes (median 58 minutes) compared with 21.2 +/- 9.0 minutes (median 20 minutes) for 169 delivered in the labour room (P < 0.0001). Of these 169 deliveries, 168 were delivered within 46 minutes and 1 delivered by caesarean section at 60 minutes. Nine women (13%) ultimately delivered by caesarean section, eight following a trial in theatre; in seven, there was malposition. Deliveries following a trial had slightly less favourable cord blood gas results.

CONCLUSIONS

Trial of instrumental delivery takes two to three times longer than delivery in the labour room; fetal malposition was the major indication for the trial of instrumental delivery and reason for failed delivery. Adopting the recent guidelines of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, at least 107 (47%) should have been managed as a trial in theatre. The added delay in delivery could be damaging to an already hypoxic fetus, and the use of a trial should be individually assessed.

Evaluation of obstetric gestures: an approach based on the curvature of 3-D positions

This paper presents a method to evaluate a gesture carried out by a resident obstetrician doctors by comparing it to a gesture carried out by an expert obstetrician doctors. The studied gesture is the forceps blade placement. Residents were recorded on a childbirth simulator while placing forceps blades. Their paths were compared in order to evaluate how similar they are to a reference path defined by an expert. The comparison method is developed with respect to expert requests: time independence and in considering the whole set of data and not only particular points. In order to respect these requests, the developed method lies on the correlation coefficient between the path curvatures. Residents have been trained on a simulator and their gestures were evaluated by comparing their path curvatures to reference path curvatures. Quantitative results confirm the qualitative analysis, residents become more similar to the reference while training on simulator.

Spinal anaesthesia in a patient with hereditary spastic paraplegia: case report and literature review

We report the use of spinal anaesthesia in a patient with hereditary spastic paraplegia who presented for manual removal of placenta following a normal vaginal delivery. This 18-year-old primigravida had been diagnosed with hereditary spastic paraplegia at 8 years of age when neurological examination revealed mild bilateral lower limb spasticity. A 25-gauge Whitacre spinal anaesthetic needle was inserted at the L3-4 intervertebral space and 0.5% plain bupivacaine 2 mL plus fentanyl 25 microg administered. The procedure was uneventful. At 24 hours postoperatively, there was full neurological recovery to pre-anaesthetic levels. The hereditary spastic paraplegias are a group of neurological disorders characterised by a slowly progressing spastic paraparesis. The neurological disorder and its anaesthetic implications are reviewed.

Palpatory diagnosis of plagiocephaly

INTRODUCTION

The term plagiocephaly, from the Greek plagios (oblique) and kephalê (head), means distortion of the head, and refers clinically to cranial asymmetry. Cranial Osteopathy, since it was first proposed, has focussed upon the diagnosis and treatment of birth trauma and cranial asymmetries, and consequently specific therapy for plagiocephalic deformities has been described. Osteopathic manipulation also has been proposed as a treatment for torticollis, a condition associated with plagiocephaly. For these reasons, we decided to look at the mechanics of the occipital bone and the adjacent atlas and bones of the cranial base, in relation to functional plagiocephaly.

METHODS

The records of 649 children seen in an osteopathic practice in Lyon, France, were reviewed retrospectively, in compliance with the legal requirements of the Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés (CRIL) and the Helsinki accord, for gender, age at presentation, birth history, obstetrical data (breech presentation, vacuum extraction, forceps delivery or Caesarean section), presenting complaint, side of posterior plagiocephaly, side of frontal plagiocephaly, torticollis, motion pattern of the occipital bone upon the atlas, and motion pattern of the spheno-occipital synchondrosis.

RESULTS

We found significant correlations between plagiocephaly (right/left) and primipara (P=0.024), use of forceps (P=0.055) and extractor suction (P=0.055). Correlations were also found between flattening of the occiput (right/left) and lateral strain of the spheno-occipital synchondrosis (P=0.002) and between plagiocephaly (right/left) and occipito-atlantal motion (P=0.000).

CONCLUSION

We found a significant correlation between the lateral strain pattern of the spheno-occipital synchondrosis and plagiocephaly and between rotational dysfunction of the occiput upon the atlas and the side of posterior plagiocephaly. We suggest that thorough neonatal osteopathic examination can identify individuals predisposed to develop posterior plagiocephaly.