Introduction and hypothesisHow body mass index (BMI) affects pelvic floor function after a second-degree perineal laceration is unknown. The hypothesis of this study is that pelvic floor dysfunction and complications after an obstetric second-degree perineal laceration are more common in women with a higher BMI 8 weeks postpartum.MethodsThis register-based cohort study includes 10,876 primiparous women with an obstetric second-degree perineal laceration between 2014 and 2021. Data were retrieved from the Swedish Perineal Laceration Registry. Outcomes in relation to maternal BMI were urinary incontinence (UI), anal incontinence (AI) and common complications attributable to the laceration. Uni- and multivariate logistic regressions were used for comparison between normal weight (BMI < 24.9, reference), overweight (25.0-29.9) and obese (& GE; 30) women.ResultsMultivariate analyses showed an increased risk for UI in both overweight and obese women compared to normal-weight women 8 weeks after a second-degree perineal laceration with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.21 (CI 1.02-1.44) and 1.27 (CI 1.13-1.58) respectively. Overweight and obese women had a decreased risk for AI (aOR 0.81, CI 0.68-0.96; aOR 0.72, CI 0.57-0.90 respectively) compared with normal-weight women. No significant differences were found in the univariate analyses over BMI strata concerning complications after perineal laceration.ConclusionsPrimiparous overweight and obese women report less AI and more UI than normal-weight women 8 weeks after a second-degree perineal laceration. No differences were found regarding complications. These findings are new and merit further study to find potential preventive factors and interventions after a second-degree perineal laceration.

Introduction and hypothesis The impact of body mass index (BMI) on pelvic floor recovery after an obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the hypothesis that urinary incontinence (UI) and anal incontinence (AI) are more common in overweight and obese women than in normal-weight women 8 weeks postpartum in women with OASI. Methods A population-based cohort study including 6,595 primiparous women, with an OASI, delivered between 2014 and 2019. Exposure and questionnaire data were retrieved from the Swedish Perineal Laceration Registry. Uni- and multivariate analyses were used to compare normal-weight (BMI <= 24.9, reference), overweight (25.0-29.9), and obese (>= 30) women with regard to UI and AI at 8 weeks post-partum. Results Multivariate analyses showed an increased risk for urinary incontinence (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.27-1.87) among overweight women as well as among obese women (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.32-2.24). In contrast to our hypothesis, both overweight women (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.56-0.83) and obese women (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.49-0.87) were at a decreased risk for any gas and/or faecal incontinence after adjustment to possible confounding factors. The absolute rate of AI was 40.1% among normal-weight women, 34.2% among overweight women, and 29.1% in the obese group. Conclusions Urinary incontinence is more common, whereas AI is less common among overweight and obese women than in primiparous women with a BMI <24.9, 8 weeks after an OASI. The new finding, that overweight women report less AI than normal-weight women, merits further study.

Risk factors for obstetric external anal sphincter injury are well known. Maternal and obstetric risk factors for internal anal sphincter injury are not extensively studied.

The rationale of this study was to evaluate the proportion of internal anal sphincter injury in women with external anal sphincter injury, diagnosed immediately after delivery.

This study will assess whether there are additional risks for obstetric internal anal sphincter injury.

Objectives

The primary aim was to assess the proportion of internal anal sphincter injury immediately in women with an external sphincter injury and to evaluate maternal and obstetric risk factors for internal anal sphincter injury in women with an external anal sphincter injury only.

A secondary aim was to relate the diagnostic methods used for obstetric perineal lacerations to the presence of an internal anal sphincter injury.

Study Design

A registry study with data from the Swedish Perineal Laceration Registry 2014–2018.

From the registry, the maternal and obstetric characteristics of 3,333 primiparous women with isolated external (N = 2,236) versus both external and internal (N = 1,097) anal sphincter injuries were studied, as were the methods used for examining the obstetric anal sphincter injuries.

Results

In 32.9 % (1,097/3,333) of primiparous women with an external anal sphincter injury, an internal anal sphincter injury was diagnosed immediately after delivery. A perineal palpatory thickness of less than 10 mm was a diagnostic sign for internal sphincter injury. Well-known risk factors associated with obstetric anal sphincter injuries could not be confirmed as independent risk factors for internal sphincter injury. When the infant is born with an arm beside the head, there is an almost two-fold increased risk for internal sphincter injury.

Conclusions

Our main finding is that 32.9 % of women with external anal sphincter injury also have an internal anal sphincter injury. A palpable perineal thickness of less than 10 mm, a degree 4-laceration and an infant born with a hand by the head increases the risk of internal sphincter injury and should be a clinical warning sign.

Introduction and Hypothesis

No measurements are available for diagnosing the extent of obstetric lacerations. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the relation between the anovaginal distance (AVD) measured with transperineal ultrasound immediately after delivery and external anal sphincter injury. A secondary aim was to assess whether the palpated perineal thickness was associated with the AVD.

Methods

A prospective observational study of 150 primiparous women at the University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden. After vaginal delivery, initial inspection and palpation of the perineal thickness were performed by the midwife. The women were then divided into subgroups depending on the degree of the suspected perineal laceration. Transperineal ultrasound of the AVD was performed by a physician. Diagnostics of the perineal laceration were done according to standard care.

Results

Women with an external sphincter injury had a shorter AVD and shorter palpatory perineal thickness compared with women without anal sphincter injury. No external sphincter injuries were diagnosed when the AVD and/or palpation height was > 20 mm. The mean AVD in the group with probable second-degree laceration (n = 85) was 18.8 mm (95% CI 17.8–19.8), in suspected third-degree laceration (n = 33) 15.7 mm (95% CI 13.7–17.7) and in probable third-degree laceration (n = 32) 11.8 mm (95% CI 9.7–13.9) (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

A short AVD could be a warning sign postpartum and should increase the awareness of possible external sphincter injury before suturing. An AVD of 20 mm seems to indicate a cutoff level of the occurrence of external sphincter injury, but this needs further evaluation.

Objective: Different regimens are used for sedation during ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography). Our objectives were to compare safety, ease of treatment, time to recovery and patients’ experiences using PCS (patient-controlled sedation) with propofol as well as sedation given by a nurse anaesthetist (ACS) with propofol or midazolam during ERCP.

Material and methods: The study included 281 adults in 301 procedures. The PCS group (n=101) delivered bolus doses of 5 mg of propofol according to their need for sedation. The ACS group (n=100) had 2-8 mg/kg/hour of propofol infused, with the target for sedation being Level 3 of the Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale (OAA/S). The control group was given 2-3 mg of midazolam for induction and additional 1 mg if required.

Results: PCS and ACS increased the ease of the procedure and reduced the numbers of sedation failures compared to midazolam sedation (ACS n=0; PCS n=4; midazolam n=20). The ACS group had more deeply sedated patients (OAA/S Level 2), desaturations and obstructed airways than the PCS and midazolam groups. Over 90% of all patients had recovered (Aldrete score≥9) by the time they returned to the ward. PCS resulted in the least fatigue and pain after the procedure. Patients’ preference for PCS and ACS were the same.

Conclusion: PCS with propofol is superior to midazolam and comparable to ACS. PCS resulted in a rapid recovery, tended to be the safest and was almost as effective as ACS in ensuring a successful examination.

Background: Patient-controlled sedation (PCS) is increasingly used for moderate sedation. Detailed understanding is essential for maintaining safety and giving the most benefit. We wanted to explore the associations between patients’ characteristics, perioperative pain and anxiety, the procedure, and the calculated concentrations at the effect site (Ce) of propofol. We also wanted to analyse the pharmacokinetic profiles of propofol and alfentanil during PCS, and their association with respiratory complications.

Methods: 155 patients were double-blinded and randomised to have propofol or propofol and alfentanil for PCS during gynaecological surgery. Pharmacokinetic simulation of Ce and multiple regressions aided the search for correlations between explanatory variables and concentrations of drugs.

Results: In group propofol, treatment for incontinence, anterior repair, and the patient’s weight correlated the best (B-coef = 0.20, 0.20 and 0.01; r = 0.69; r² = 0.48). When alfentanil was added, alfentanil and the patient’s weight were associated with Ce of propofol (B-coef = -0.40 and 0.01; r = 0.70; r² = 0.43). Logistic regression indicated that age and Ce of drugs were related to ten cases of respiratory complications.

Conclusions: Patients’ weights and the type of surgery performed were associated with the Ce of propofol; this knowledge could be used for refinement of the doses given during PCS. Because the pharmacokinetic profiles of propofol and alfentanil are different, the alfentanil effect becomes predominant during the time course of sedation. In order to reduce the risk of early and late respiratory depression, alfentanil should not be added to propofol in the same syringe.

Background

Widespread use of patient-controlled sedation (PCS) demands simplicity and a predictable outcome. We evaluated patients’ safety and ease of use of PCS for gynaecological outpatient procedures.

Methods

In a prospective double-blind study, 165 patients were randomized to use propofol or propofol with alfentanil as PCS combined with local anaesthetic for pain control. Data on cardiopulmonary function, consciousness, and need for interventions were collected at baseline and every fifth minute. The surgeons’ evaluation of the ease and the duration of the procedure were recorded.

Results

One hundred and fifty-five patients used PCS for the entire procedure, 76 patients propofol, and 79 patients propofol/alfentanil. Fifteen procedures in the propofol group were limited or could not be done, compared with four in the propofol/alfentanil group (P = 0.02). The duration of surgery was not affected. The addition of alfentanil affected respiratory function compared with the propofol group: five patients compared with none were manually ventilated (P = 0.03), and two thirds, compared with a quarter, were given supplementary oxygen as their saturation decreased below 90% (P < 0.001). Overall cardiovascular stability was maintained. The propofol group had deeper conscious sedation as measured by the bispectral index (P  = 0.03), but all patients could be roused. In the propofol/alfentanil group, five patients became apnoeic and could not be roused.

Conclusions

PCS using propofol alone supports patients’ safety, as the addition of alfentanil increased the need for specific interventions to maintain respiratory stability. However, alfentanil increases the feasibility of the procedure, as complementary doses of propofol were not required.

n/a

Objective  To establish the long term effects of obstetric anal sphincter rupture.

Design  Prospective observational study.

Setting  University hospital in Sweden.

Population  Eighty-two women from a prospective study from 1990 to compare anorectal function after third degree tear.

Methods  Women completed a structured questionnaire, underwent a clinical examination and anorectal manometry, endoanal ultrasound (EAUSG) with perineal body measurement.

Main outcome measures  Symptoms of anal incontinence, sexual symptoms, anal manometry scores and evidence of sphincter damage on EAUSG.

Results  Five women had undergone secondary repair and three were lost to follow up. Fifty-one women (80%) completed the questionnaire. Twenty-six out of 46 (57%) of the original study group and 6/28 (20%) of the original controls were examined. Incontinence to flatus and liquid stool was more severe in the study group than in controls. Flatus incontinence was significantly more pronounced among women with subsequent vaginal deliveries. Mean maximal anal squeeze pressures were 69 mmHg in the partial rupture group and 42 mmHg in the complete rupture group (P= 0.04). Study group women with signs of internal sphincter injury reported more pronounced faecal incontinence and had lower anal resting pressures (24 mmHg) than those with intact internal sphincters (40 mmHg) (P= 0.01). Perineal body thickness of less than 10 mm was associated with incontinence for flatus and liquid stools, less lubrication during sex and lower anal squeeze pressures (58 mmHg vs 89 mmHg, P= 0.04).

Conclusions  Subjective and objective anal function after anal sphincter injury deteriorates further over time and with subsequent vaginal deliveries. Thin perineal body and internal sphincter injury seem to be important for continence and anal pressure.

Objective.  To describe a general population of women with regard to factors associated with urinary and fecal incontinence and genital prolapse symptoms.

Methods.  A questionnaire about medical background, urinary and fecal incontinence and genital prolapse symptoms was mailed to 1000 40-year-old and 1000 60-year-old Swedish women. Associations were described by odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results.  Sixty-seven percent answered the questionnaire. Multivariate analysis showed urinary incontinence to be associated with anal sphincter rupture [OR 4.4 (95%  CI 1.0–18.8)], pelvic heaviness [3.8 (2.1–7.0)], body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m²[3.7 (2.0–6.7)], multiparity [1.8 (1.0–3.4)], varicose veins surgery [1.9 (1.2–3.2)] and age [1.9 (1.2–3.2)]. Univariate analyses revealed statistically significant associations between urinary incontinence and incontinence for flatus [4.8 (3.0–7.8)], for liquid stool [5.0 (2.9–8.6)] and for solid stool [5.9 (2.4–14.2)]. Chronic bronchitis [5.7 (1.7–18.9)] was strongly associated with urinary incontinence but was only reported by the older age group. Prolapse symptoms were strongly associated with both urinary and fecal incontinence. Prolapse symptoms as opposed to urinary and fecal incontinence seemed to be associated more with injuries at delivery than with chronic pelvic floor strain.

Conclusions.  Women with urinary incontinence are also likely to suffer from fecal incontinence and prolapse and vice versa. Other associated factors for pelvic floor dysfunction were overweight, and especially obesity, chronic bronchitis, vaginal delivery and multiparity, age, heredity and diseases suggestive of collagen disorders. A multidisciplinary management of women with pelvic floor symptoms is suggested and possible prevention is discussed.