TY - JOUR
T1 - Re-suturing of puerperal perineal wound
T2 - An assessment of indications, risk factors and outcomes
AU - Rotem, Reut
AU - Sela, Hen Y.
AU - Reichman, Orna
AU - Weintraub, Adi Y.
AU - Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina
AU - Rottenstreich, Misgav
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020
PY - 2020/8/1
Y1 - 2020/8/1
N2 - Objective: To assess the frequency of puerperal perineal wound re-suturing, and to evaluate the indications, risk factors and outcomes of this procedure. Study design: A retrospective series of all parturients that underwent puerperal perineal tear suturing between 2005 and 2019 was undertaken. All parturients who required re-suturing during the delivery hospitalization were identified and compared with those who had puerperal perineal wound repair and did not require re-suturing. General demographics, obstetrical history, current delivery characteristics, re-suturing indications, and outcome were obtained and analyzed. Results: During the study period, 54,934 parturients required puerperal perineal tear suturing, of which 47 (0.09%) required re-suturing within their postpartum hospitalization. Median time from delivery to perineal re-suturing was 5.38 h [IQR 4.07–7.14]. The most common indication was vulvovaginal hematoma (n = 37, 78.7%). The independent risk factors found to be associated with re-suturing were: cephalic malposition (aOR 9.3, 95% CI 1.26–67.74) and meconium stained amniotic fluid (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.10–3.85). Parturients who underwent re-suturing had significantly higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage (78.5% vs. 11.4%) blood transfusions (36.2% vs. 1.3%), puerperal fever, and longer hospitalizations (P < 0.01 for all). Conclusion: In our population, early re-suturing of puerperal perineal tears is rare, however, it is associated with increased short term maternal morbidity.
AB - Objective: To assess the frequency of puerperal perineal wound re-suturing, and to evaluate the indications, risk factors and outcomes of this procedure. Study design: A retrospective series of all parturients that underwent puerperal perineal tear suturing between 2005 and 2019 was undertaken. All parturients who required re-suturing during the delivery hospitalization were identified and compared with those who had puerperal perineal wound repair and did not require re-suturing. General demographics, obstetrical history, current delivery characteristics, re-suturing indications, and outcome were obtained and analyzed. Results: During the study period, 54,934 parturients required puerperal perineal tear suturing, of which 47 (0.09%) required re-suturing within their postpartum hospitalization. Median time from delivery to perineal re-suturing was 5.38 h [IQR 4.07–7.14]. The most common indication was vulvovaginal hematoma (n = 37, 78.7%). The independent risk factors found to be associated with re-suturing were: cephalic malposition (aOR 9.3, 95% CI 1.26–67.74) and meconium stained amniotic fluid (aOR 2.1, 95% CI 1.10–3.85). Parturients who underwent re-suturing had significantly higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage (78.5% vs. 11.4%) blood transfusions (36.2% vs. 1.3%), puerperal fever, and longer hospitalizations (P < 0.01 for all). Conclusion: In our population, early re-suturing of puerperal perineal tears is rare, however, it is associated with increased short term maternal morbidity.
KW - Delivery
KW - Perineal hematomas
KW - Perineal tear
KW - Postpartum
KW - Re-suturing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85085298535&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.05.028
DO - 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.05.028
M3 - Article
C2 - 32480179
AN - SCOPUS:85085298535
SN - 0301-2115
VL - 251
SP - 42
EP - 47
JO - European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
JF - European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
ER -