Fetomaternal Outcome in Instrumental Vaginal Delivery
Authors/Creators
- 1. Senior Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, MKCG Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur
- 2. Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, MKCG Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur
Description
Objective: Instrumental vaginal delivery is anagelong obstetric practice used to expedete vaginal delivery and avoid caesarean delivery. This study is to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of vacuum versus forceps application in assisted vaginal delivery. Material and Method: Women in labor with vertex presentation were delivered by vacuum and forceps. A total of 110 cases were included in this prospective study. Maternal and neonatal morbidity were compared in terms of perineal lacerations, episiotomy extension, post-partum hemorrhage, Apgar score, instrumental injuries of the baby, NICU admissions PNM etc. Prospective observational study was used to analyze the data. Observations: Maternal morbidity viz. episiotomy extension as well as first and second-degree perineal tear were significant in the forceps group compared to ventouse. (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.02, respectively). With regards to neonatal morbidity, no statistically significant difference was noted. Conclusion: Vacuum and forceps should remain appropriate tools in the armamentarium of the modern obstetrician. However, ventouse may be chosen first (if there is no fetal distress) as it is significantly less likely to injure the mother.
Abstract (English)
Objective: Instrumental vaginal delivery is anagelong obstetric practice used to expedete vaginal delivery and avoid caesarean delivery. This study is to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of vacuum versus forceps application in assisted vaginal delivery. Material and Method: Women in labor with vertex presentation were delivered by vacuum and forceps. A total of 110 cases were included in this prospective study. Maternal and neonatal morbidity were compared in terms of perineal lacerations, episiotomy extension, post-partum hemorrhage, Apgar score, instrumental injuries of the baby, NICU admissions PNM etc. Prospective observational study was used to analyze the data. Observations: Maternal morbidity viz. episiotomy extension as well as first and second-degree perineal tear were significant in the forceps group compared to ventouse. (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.02, respectively). With regards to neonatal morbidity, no statistically significant difference was noted. Conclusion: Vacuum and forceps should remain appropriate tools in the armamentarium of the modern obstetrician. However, ventouse may be chosen first (if there is no fetal distress) as it is significantly less likely to injure the mother.
Files
IJPCR,Vol14,Issue7,Article102.pdf
Files
(139.4 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:720f620d08f5a3b8612c4f759016e083
|
139.4 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2022-06-05
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/14/IJPCR,Vol14,Issue7,Article102.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Anonymous. Vacuum versus forceps. (Editorial). Lancet. 1984;1:144. 2. Meniru GI. An analysis of recent trends in vacuum extraction and forceps delivery in the United Kingdom. BJOG: An Intern J Obstetr Gynaecol. 1996;103(2):168-70. 3. Learman LA. Regional differences in operative obstetrics: a look to the South. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 1998;92(4 Part 1):514-9. 4. Hillier CE, Johanson RB. Worldwide survey of assisted vaginal delivery. Intern J Gynecol Obstetr. 1994;47(2):109-14. 5. Johanson RB, Rice C, Doyle M, Arthur J, Anyanwu L, Ibrahim J, et al. A randomised prospective study comparing the new vacuum extractor policy with forceps delivery. Intern J Obstetr Gynaecol. 1993; 100(6): 524¬30. 6. Lurie S, Glezerman M, Sadan O. Maternal and neonatal effects of forceps versus vacuum operative vaginadelivery. Intern J Gynecol Obstetr. 2005;89(3):293-4. 7. Akhtar S. Comparison of maternal and infant outcome between vacuum extraction and forceps deliveries. Pakistan Armed Force Med J. 2006; 2(1):25-31. 8. Nkwabong E, Nana PN, Mbu R, Takang W, Ekono MR, Kouam L. Indications and maternofetal outcome ofinstrumental deliveries at the University Teaching Hospital of Yaounde, Cameroon. Tropical doctor. 2011;41(1):5-7. 9. Singh A, Rathore P. A comparative study of fetomaternal outcome in instrumental vaginal delivery. The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India. 2011;61(6):663-6. 10. Achanna S, Monga D. Outcome of forceps delivery versus vacuum extraction-a review of 200 cases. Parity. 1994;3(1.4):3-4.