Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 6/2019

Open Access 01-06-2019 | Original Article

Anovaginal distance and obstetric anal sphincter injury: a prospective observational study

Authors: Sofia Pihl, Eva Uustal, Marie Blomberg

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 6/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

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.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Andrews V, Sultan AH, Thakar R, et al. Occult anal sphincter injuries—myth or reality? BJOG. 2006;113:195–200.CrossRefPubMed Andrews V, Sultan AH, Thakar R, et al. Occult anal sphincter injuries—myth or reality? BJOG. 2006;113:195–200.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Dudding TC, Vaizey CJ, Kamm MA. Obstetric anal sphincter injury: incidence, risk factors, and management. Ann Surg. 2008;247:224–37.CrossRefPubMed Dudding TC, Vaizey CJ, Kamm MA. Obstetric anal sphincter injury: incidence, risk factors, and management. Ann Surg. 2008;247:224–37.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Faltin DL, Boulvain M, Floris LA, et al. Diagnosis of anal sphincter tears to prevent fecal incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:6–13.CrossRefPubMed Faltin DL, Boulvain M, Floris LA, et al. Diagnosis of anal sphincter tears to prevent fecal incontinence: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:6–13.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Geller EJ, Robinson BL, Matthews CA, et al. Perineal body length as a risk factor for ultrasound-diagnosed anal sphincter tear at first delivery. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25:631–6.CrossRefPubMed Geller EJ, Robinson BL, Matthews CA, et al. Perineal body length as a risk factor for ultrasound-diagnosed anal sphincter tear at first delivery. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25:631–6.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Harvey MA, Pierce M, Alter JE, et al. Obstetrical anal sphincter injuries (OASIS): prevention, recognition, and repair. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015;37:1131–48.CrossRefPubMed Harvey MA, Pierce M, Alter JE, et al. Obstetrical anal sphincter injuries (OASIS): prevention, recognition, and repair. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015;37:1131–48.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Maslovitz S, Jaffa A, Levin I, et al. The clinical significance of postpartum transperineal ultrasound of the anal sphincter. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007;134:115–9.CrossRefPubMed Maslovitz S, Jaffa A, Levin I, et al. The clinical significance of postpartum transperineal ultrasound of the anal sphincter. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007;134:115–9.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Orno AK, Marsal K Fau-Herbst A, Herbst A. Ultrasonographic anatomy of perineal structures during pregnancy and immediately following obstetric injury. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32:527–34. Orno AK, Marsal K Fau-Herbst A, Herbst A. Ultrasonographic anatomy of perineal structures during pregnancy and immediately following obstetric injury. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32:527–34.
8.
go back to reference Ozyurt S, Aksoy H, Fau-Gedikbasi A, Gedikbasi A, Fau-Yildirim G et al. Screening occult anal sphincter injuries in primigravid women after vaginal delivery with transperineal use of vaginal probe: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015;292:853–9. Ozyurt S, Aksoy H, Fau-Gedikbasi A, Gedikbasi A, Fau-Yildirim G et al. Screening occult anal sphincter injuries in primigravid women after vaginal delivery with transperineal use of vaginal probe: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015;292:853–9.
9.
go back to reference Pihl S, Uustal E, Hjertberg L et al. Interobserver agreement in perineal ultrasound measurement of the anovaginal distance: a methodological study. Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29:697–701. Pihl S, Uustal E, Hjertberg L et al. Interobserver agreement in perineal ultrasound measurement of the anovaginal distance: a methodological study. Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29:697–701.
10.
go back to reference Roos AM, Abdool Z, Sultan AH, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of endovaginal and transperineal ultrasound for detecting anal sphincter defects: the PREDICT study. Clin Radiol. 2011;66:597–604.CrossRefPubMed Roos AM, Abdool Z, Sultan AH, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of endovaginal and transperineal ultrasound for detecting anal sphincter defects: the PREDICT study. Clin Radiol. 2011;66:597–604.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Roos AM, Thakar R, Sultan AH. Outcome of primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS): does the grade of tear matter? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;36:368–74.CrossRefPubMed Roos AM, Thakar R, Sultan AH. Outcome of primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS): does the grade of tear matter? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;36:368–74.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Santoro GA, Wieczorek AP, Dietz HP, et al. State of the art: an integrated approach to pelvic floor ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37:381–96.CrossRefPubMed Santoro GA, Wieczorek AP, Dietz HP, et al. State of the art: an integrated approach to pelvic floor ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37:381–96.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Shobeiri SA, Nolan TE, Yordan-Jovet R, et al. Digital examination compared to trans-perineal ultrasound for the evaluation of anal sphincter repair. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002;78:31–6.CrossRefPubMed Shobeiri SA, Nolan TE, Yordan-Jovet R, et al. Digital examination compared to trans-perineal ultrasound for the evaluation of anal sphincter repair. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002;78:31–6.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Stewart LK, Wilson SR. Transvaginal sonography of the anal sphincter: reliable, or not? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:179–85.CrossRefPubMed Stewart LK, Wilson SR. Transvaginal sonography of the anal sphincter: reliable, or not? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:179–85.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Smilen SW, et al. Simple ultrasound evaluation of the anal sphincter in female patients using a transvaginal transducer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;25:177–83.CrossRefPubMed Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Smilen SW, et al. Simple ultrasound evaluation of the anal sphincter in female patients using a transvaginal transducer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;25:177–83.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Van Delft K, Schwertner-Tiepelmann N, Thakar R, et al. Recruitment of pregnant women in research. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;33:442–6.CrossRefPubMed Van Delft K, Schwertner-Tiepelmann N, Thakar R, et al. Recruitment of pregnant women in research. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;33:442–6.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Anovaginal distance and obstetric anal sphincter injury: a prospective observational study
Authors
Sofia Pihl
Eva Uustal
Marie Blomberg
Publication date
01-06-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 6/2019
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-018-3838-5

Other articles of this Issue 6/2019

International Urogynecology Journal 6/2019 Go to the issue