Objective: Evaluating the effect of perineal length on the duration of the\nsecond stage of labor, the mode of delivery, the need for episiotomy and the\npossibility of perineal and vaginal tears needing repair. Participants and\nMethods: It is a prospective hospital-based observational study done on 483\nparturient women in a university hospital. Personal, medical and obstetric\ndata together with the measurement of perineal length were recorded in the\nfirst stage of labor. We followed up the progress of labor until delivery. Regression\nmodels were used to consider possible risk factors of episiotomy or\ntears needed repair. Results: The mean duration of the second stage of labor\nwas significantly longer among women with a perineum of â�¥4 cm length\nwhen compared with those with a perineal length of <4 cm (36.7 �± 13.05 vs.\n26.9 �± 10.4 minutes; respectively). Regression analysis of possible risk factors\nshowed that circumcised primigravida with long perineum (â�¥ 4 cm) are more\nliable to have episiotomy (OR (95%CI) 1.96 (1.1 - 3.5); 20.9 (11.1 - 39.5); 4.8\n(2.5 - 9.2); respectively). Tears needed to repair are however, more common\nin circumcised women with short perineum (<4 cm) who delivered without\nepisiotomy (OR (95%CI) 14.16 (8.1 - 24.9); 4.54 (1.5 - 14) respectively. Conclusion:\nLonger perineum is associated with increase in the duration of the\nsecond stage of labor. Obstetricians should expect the need of episiotomy\nwhen confronted with circumcised primigravida with long perineum. However,\nif the perineum is short they should not be deceived, short perineum is\nmore probably torn.
Loading....