Maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to the instrument used for mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery: a prospective cohort study

TY - JOUR

T1 - Maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to the instrument used for mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery

T2 - a prospective cohort study

AU - Bahl, R.

AU - Van de Venne, M.

AU - Macleod, M.

AU - Strachan, B.

AU - Murphy, D. J.

PY - 2013/11

Y1 - 2013/11

N2 - Objective: To compare the maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with alternative instruments used to perform a mid-cavity rotational delivery. Design: A prospective cohort study. Setting: Two university teaching hospitals in Scotland and England. Population: Three hundred and eighty-one nulliparous women who had a mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery. Methods: A data collection sheet was completed by the research team following delivery. Main outcome measures: Postpartum haemorrhage, third- and fourth-degree perineal tears, low cord pH, neonatal trauma, and failed or sequential operative vaginal delivery. Results: One hundred and sixty-three women (42.8%) underwent manual rotation followed by non-rotational forceps delivery, 73 (19.1%) had a rotational vacuum delivery, and 145 (38.1%) delivered with the assistance of rotational (Kielland) forceps. The rates of postpartum haemorrhage were similar when comparing manual rotation with rotational vacuum (adjusted OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.66-3.98), and when comparing manual rotation with Kielland forceps (adjusted OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.71-2.88). The results were comparable for third- and fourth-degree perineal tears (adjusted OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.13-1.89; adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.39-1.82), low cord pH (adjusted OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.44-6.91; adjusted OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.44-2.83), neonatal trauma (adjusted OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.16-1.55; adjusted OR 3.25, 95% CI 0.65-16.17), and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (adjusted OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.45-4.81; adjusted OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.49-2.19). The sequential use of instruments was less likely with manual rotation and forceps than with rotational vacuum delivery (0.6 versus 36.9%, OR 0.01, 95% CI 0.002-0.090). Conclusions: Maternal and perinatal outcomes are comparable with Kielland forceps, vacuum extraction, and manual rotation, with few serious adverse outcomes. With appropriate training mid-cavity rotational delivery can be practiced safely, including the use of Kielland forceps. © 2013 RCOG.

AB - Objective: To compare the maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with alternative instruments used to perform a mid-cavity rotational delivery. Design: A prospective cohort study. Setting: Two university teaching hospitals in Scotland and England. Population: Three hundred and eighty-one nulliparous women who had a mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery. Methods: A data collection sheet was completed by the research team following delivery. Main outcome measures: Postpartum haemorrhage, third- and fourth-degree perineal tears, low cord pH, neonatal trauma, and failed or sequential operative vaginal delivery. Results: One hundred and sixty-three women (42.8%) underwent manual rotation followed by non-rotational forceps delivery, 73 (19.1%) had a rotational vacuum delivery, and 145 (38.1%) delivered with the assistance of rotational (Kielland) forceps. The rates of postpartum haemorrhage were similar when comparing manual rotation with rotational vacuum (adjusted OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.66-3.98), and when comparing manual rotation with Kielland forceps (adjusted OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.71-2.88). The results were comparable for third- and fourth-degree perineal tears (adjusted OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.13-1.89; adjusted OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.39-1.82), low cord pH (adjusted OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.44-6.91; adjusted OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.44-2.83), neonatal trauma (adjusted OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.16-1.55; adjusted OR 3.25, 95% CI 0.65-16.17), and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (adjusted OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.45-4.81; adjusted OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.49-2.19). The sequential use of instruments was less likely with manual rotation and forceps than with rotational vacuum delivery (0.6 versus 36.9%, OR 0.01, 95% CI 0.002-0.090). Conclusions: Maternal and perinatal outcomes are comparable with Kielland forceps, vacuum extraction, and manual rotation, with few serious adverse outcomes. With appropriate training mid-cavity rotational delivery can be practiced safely, including the use of Kielland forceps. © 2013 RCOG.

U2 - 10.1111/1471-0528.12398

DO - 10.1111/1471-0528.12398

M3 - Article

SN - 1470-0328

VL - 120

SP - 1526

EP - 1532

JO - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology

JF - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology

IS - 12

ER -