Document Detail


Use of uterine fundal pressure maneuver at vaginal delivery and risk of severe perineal laceration.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  19263062     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
OBJECTIVE: Owing to the lack of evidence supporting the use of uterine fundal pressure maneuver in vaginal delivery, the role of the maneuver is undetermined and remains controversial. The aim of this study was to identify the prone factor of the use of uterine fundal pressure maneuver and to evaluate its obstetrical outcomes. METHODS: All vaginal delivery records between 1 January 2005 and 30 April 2006 were evaluated. Maternal and neonatal variables and obstetrical complications were analyzed for subjects underwent uterine fundal pressure maneuver. RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-one vaginal deliveries were evaluated. Fundal pressure maneuver was performed in 39 cases (5.9%, 95% CI 4.4-7.1). Primiparity (76.9 vs. 53.3%; odds ratio 2.92, 95% CI 1.36-6.25, P = 0.004), larger maternal body weight gain during pregnancy (11.16 +/- 0.4 kg vs. 10.05 +/- 0.16 kg, P = 0.013), and longer duration of labor (922.3 +/- 111.7 vs. 566.6 +/- 18.3 min, P = 0.003) were prone risk factors for the use of uterine fundal pressure maneuver at vaginal delivery. One case of shoulder dystocia following uterine fundal pressure maneuver was reported (2.5 vs. 0%). Episiotomy (76.9 vs. 44.9%, P < 0.001) and vacuum extraction (41.0 vs. 3.8%, P < 0.001) were frequently performed with uterine fundal pressure maneuver. Uterine fundal pressure maneuver increased the risk of severe perineal laceration (28.1 vs. 4.8%; odds ratio 2.71, 95% CI 1.03-7.15, P = 0.045). The risk of severe perineal laceration was synergistically increased with the concurrent use of uterine fundal pressure maneuver with vacuum extraction and episiotomy. CONCLUSION: Uterine fundal pressure maneuver during the second stage of labor increased the risk of severe perineal laceration. The use of the maneuver must be cautioned and careful attention must be paid to its application.
Authors:
Koji Matsuo; Yasuhiko Shiki; Masato Yamasaki; Koichiro Shimoya
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article     Date:  2009-03-05
Journal Detail:
Title:  Archives of gynecology and obstetrics     Volume:  280     ISSN:  1432-0711     ISO Abbreviation:  Arch. Gynecol. Obstet.     Publication Date:  2009 Nov 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2009-09-25     Completed Date:  2010-01-28     Revised Date:  2010-03-12    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8710213     Medline TA:  Arch Gynecol Obstet     Country:  Germany    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  781-6     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 22 South Greene Street, PO Box 290, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. koji.matsuo@gmail.com
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Adult
Delivery, Obstetric / adverse effects*,  methods*
Female
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Lacerations / etiology
Logistic Models
Perineum / injuries*
Pregnancy
Pressure
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Uterine Contraction / physiology
Uterus / physiology
Comments/Corrections
Comment In:
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 Apr;281(4):779-80   [PMID:  19834721 ]
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 Mar;281(3):579-80   [PMID:  19774390 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  A rare case of invasive vaginal carcinoma associated with vaginal prolapse.
Next Document:  Weekly intramuscular methotrexate in the treatment of low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.