Management of Third and Fourth-Degree Perineal Tears After Vaginal Birth. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry No. 015/079, December 2020)

Abstract

Purpose This guideline provides recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up care of 3rd and 4th degree perineal tears which occur during vaginal birth. The aim is to improve the management of 3rd and 4th degree perineal tears and reduce the immediate and long-term damage. The guideline is intended for midwives, obstetricians and physicians involved in caring for high-grade perineal tears.

Methods A selective search of the literature was carried out. Consensus about the recommendations and statements was achieved as part of a structured process during a consensus conference with neutral moderation.

Recommendations After every vaginal birth, a careful inspection and/or palpation by the obstetrician and/or the midwife must be carried out to exclude a 3rd or 4th degree perineal tear. Vaginal and anorectal palpation is essential to assess the extent of birth trauma. The surgical team must also include a specialist physician with the appropriate expertise (preferably an obstetrician or a gynecologist or a specialist for coloproctology) who must be on call. In exceptional cases, treatment may also be delayed for up to 12 hours postpartum to ensure that a specialist is available to treat the individual layers affected by trauma. As neither the end-to-end technique nor the overlapping technique have been found to offer better results for the management of tears of the external anal sphincter, the surgeon must use the method with which he/she is most familiar. Creation of a bowel stoma during primary management of a perineal tear is not indicated. Daily cleaning of the area under running water is recommended, particularly after bowel movements. Cleaning may be carried out either by rinsing or alternate cold and warm water douches. Therapy should also include the postoperative use of laxatives over a period of at least 2 weeks. The patient must be informed about the impact of the injury on subsequent births as well as the possibility of anal incontinence.

 

MissingLinkText

Key words

guideline - perineal tear - management perineal tear - OASI

I  Guideline Information

Guidelines program of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG

For information on the guidelines program, please refer to the end of the guideline.

 

MissingLinkText

Citation format

Management of Third and Fourth-Degree Perineal Tears After Vaginal Birth. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k-Level, AWMF Registry No. 015/079, December 2020). Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2022. doi:10.1055/a-1933-2647

 

MissingLinkText

Guideline documents

The complete long version in German, a slide version of this guideline as well as a list of the conflicts of interest of all of the authors is available on the homepage of the AWMF: https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/015-079.html

 

MissingLinkText

Guideline authors

See [Tables 1] and [2].

Table 1 Lead author and/or coordinating guideline author.

Author	AWMF professional society
Prof. Dr. Werner Bader	German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe [DGGG]) Working Group for Urogynecology and Pelvic Floor Plastic Reconstruction (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und plastische Beckenbodenrekonstruktion [AGUB])
Dr. Stephan Kropshofer	Austrian Urogynecology Working Group for Reconstructive Pelvic Floor Surgery (Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie [AUB])

Table 2 Participating guideline authors.

Author Mandate holder	DGGG working group (AG)/ AWMF/non-AWMF professional society/ organization/association
Priv. Doz. Dr. Thomas Aigmüller	Austrian Urogynecology Working Group for Reconstructive Pelvic Floor Surgery (Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie [AUB])
Dr. Kathrin Beilecke	German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe [DGGG]) Working Group for Urogynecology and Pelvic Floor Plastic Reconstruction (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und plastische Beckenbodenrekonstruktion [AGUB])
Prof. Dr. Andrea Frudinger	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Dr. Ksenia Krögler-Halpern	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Prof. Dr. Engelbert Hanzal	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Prof. Dr. Hanns Helmer	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Dr. Susanne Hölbfer	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Dr. Hansjörg Huemer	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Moenie van der Kleyn, MPH	Austrian Midwives Association (Österreichisches Hebammengremium)
Dr. Irmgard E. Kronberger	Austrian Working Group for Coloproctology (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Coloproktologie Österreich [ACP])
Prof. Dr. Annette Kuhn	Swiss Working Group for Urogynecology and Pelvic Floor Pathology (Schweizerische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Beckenbodenpathologie [AUG])
Prof. Dr. Johann Pfeifer	Austrian Surgical Society (Österreichische Gesellschaft für Chirurgie [ÖGC])
Prof. Dr. Christl Reisenauer	Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG) Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und plastische Beckenbodenrekonstruktion (AGUB)
Prof. Dr. Karl Tamussino	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Umek	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Dr. Dieter Kölle	Österreichische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Rekonstruktive Beckenbodenchirurgie (AUB)
Prof. Dr. Michael Abou-Dakn	Working Group for Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Geburtshilfe und Pränatalmedizin e. V. [AGG])
Prof. Dr. Boris Gabriel	Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und plastische Beckenbodenrekonstruktion e. V. (AGUB)
Prof. Dr. Oliver Schwandner	Surgical Working Group for Coloproctology in Germany (Chirurgische Arbeitsgemeinschaft Coloproktologie Deutschland [CACP])
Prof. Dr. Annette Kuhn	Schweizerische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Urogynäkologie und Beckenbodenpathologie (AUG)
Dr. Irmgard E. Kronberger	Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Coloproktologie Österreich (ACP)
Priv. Doz. Dr. Gunda Pristauz-Telsnigg	Austrian Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (Österreichische Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe [OEGGG])
Petra Welskop	Österreichisches Hebammengremium

The following professional societies/working groups/organizations/associations stated that they wished to contribute to the text of the guideline and participate in the consensus conference and nominated representatives to contribute and attend ([Table 2]).

The guideline was moderated by Dr. Monika Nothacker (AWMF-certified guideline consultant/moderator).

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

II  Guideline Application

Purpose and objectives

The guideline provides recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up care of 3rd and 4th degree perineal tears that occur during vaginal birth. The aim is to improve the management of 3rd and 4th degree tears and reduce the immediate and long-term damage. The guideline is intended for midwives, obstetricians and physicians involved in the care of high-grade perineal tears.

 

MissingLinkText

Targeted areas of patient care

• Inpatient care

• Outpatient care

 

MissingLinkText

Target user groups/target audience

This guideline is devised for the following groups of professionals:

• gynecologists in private practice

• gynecologists based in hospitals

• midwives

• coloproctologists

 

MissingLinkText

Adoption and period of validity

The validity of this guideline was confirmed by the executive boards/representatives of the participating professional societies/working groups/organizations/associations as well as by the board of the DGGG, the DGGG Guidelines Commission and the OEGGG and SGGG in December 2019 and was thereby approved in its entirety. This guideline is valid from 1 February 2020 through to 31 January 2023. Because of the contents of this guideline, this period of validity is only an estimate.

The guideline can be reviewed and updated at an earlier point in time if urgently required. If the guideline still reflects the current state of knowledge, the period of validity can be extended for a maximum period of five years.

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

III  Methodology

Basic principles

The method used to prepare this guideline was determined by the class to which this guideline was assigned. The AWMF Guidance Manual (Version 1.0) has set out the respective rules and requirements for different classes of guidelines. Guidelines are differentiated into lowest (S1), intermediate (S2), and highest (S3) class. The lowest class is defined as consisting of a set of recommendations for action compiled by a non-representative group of experts. In 2004, the S2 class was divided into two subclasses: a systematic evidence-based subclass (S2e) and a structural consensus-based subclass (S2k). The highest S3 class combines both approaches.

This guideline was classified as: S2k

 

MissingLinkText

Grading of recommendations

The grading of evidence based on the systematic search, selection, evaluation and synthesis of an evidence base which is then used to grade the recommendations is not envisaged for S2k guidelines. The different individual statements and recommendations are only differentiated by syntax, not by symbols ([Table 3]):

Table 3 Grading of recommendations (based on Lomotan et al., Qual Saf Health Care 2010).

Description of binding character	Expression
Strong recommendation with highly binding character	must/must not
Regular recommendation with moderately binding character	should/should not
Open recommendation with limited binding character	may/may not

 

MissingLinkText

Statements

Expositions or explanations of specific facts, circumstances or problems without any direct recommendations for action included in this guideline are referred to as “statements”. It is not possible to provide any information about the level of evidence for these statements.

 

MissingLinkText

Achieving consensus and level of consensus

At structured NIH-type consensus-based conferences (S2k/S3 level), authorized participants attending the session vote on draft statements and recommendations. The process is as follows. A recommendation is presented, its contents are discussed, proposed changes are put forward, and all proposed changes are voted on. If a consensus (> 75% of votes) is not achieved, there is another round of discussions, followed by a repeat vote. Finally, the extent of consensus is determined, based on the number of participants ([Table 4]).

Table 4 Level of consensus based on extent of agreement.

Symbol	Level of consensus	Extent of agreement
+++	Strong consensus	> 95% of participants agree
++	Consensus	> 75 – 95% of participants agree
+	Majority agreement	> 50 – 75% of participants agree
–	No consensus	< 51% of participants agree

 

MissingLinkText

Expert consensus

As the term already indicates, this refers to consensus decisions taken specifically with regard to recommendations/statements issued without a prior systematic search of the literature (S2k) or where evidence is lacking (S2e/S3). The term “expert consensus” (EC) used here is synonymous with terms used in other guidelines such as “good clinical practice” (GCP) or “clinical consensus point” (CCP). The strength of the recommendation is graded as previously described in the chapter Grading of recommendations but without the use of symbols; it is only expressed semantically (“must”/“must not” or “should”/“should not” or “may”/“may not”).

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

IV  Guideline

1  Epidemiology

Consensus-based recommendation 1.E1
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
If an episiotomy is indicated, the incision should be made in a mediolateral direction to prevent the incision from injuring the anal sphincter.

According to the Austrian Registry of Births, in 2017 a 3rd degree perineal tear during vaginal birth occurred in 1.9% of cases and a 4th degree perineal tear in 0.1%. 3.1% of primiparous women suffered a 3rd degree perineal tear and 0.2% had a 4th degree perineal tear. The respective figures for multiparous woman were 0.9% (grade 3 PT) and 0.1% (grade 4 PT) [1].

In Germany, the respective incidences for the year 2017 were 1.74% (grade 3 PT) and 0.12% (grade 4 PT). There were no data on the respective incidence in primiparous and multiparous women [2].

In contrast to these figures, a systematic review reported an incidence of 11% for tears of the external or internal anal sphincter [3].

In recent years, the reported incidence of high-grade perineal tears has increased. This increase has primarily been attributed to improvements in the detection rate [4], [5], [6].

Symptoms subsequent to perineal tears include flatulence incontinence, pathological urge to defecate and, more rarely, fecal incontinence with the consistency ranging from watery to firm stools. The frequency of these symptoms tends to increase over the years following the birth [7], [8], [9].

According to the literature [5], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], the list of risk factors in descending order of importance (the respective odds ratios (OR) are given in brackets) are:

• use of forceps during the birth (OR 2.9 – 4.9)

• a birth weight of > 4 kg or an occipital frontal circumference of > 35 cm (OR 1.4 – 5.2; it increases with the birth weight of the infant)

• a median episiotomy (OR 2.4 – 2.9)

• nulliparity (OR 2.4)

• vacuum extraction delivery (OR 1.7 – 2.9)

• status post female genital mutilation (OR 1.6 – 2.7)

• occiput posterior position of the fetus (OR 1.7 – 3.4)

• shoulder dystocia (OR 2)

• prolonged second stage of labor (OR 1.2 – 3.9)

• Kristeller maneuver/fundal pressure (OR 1.8)

• delivery in the lithotomy position or squatting position (OR 1.2 – 2.2)

Risk-reducing factors are [5], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34]:

• selective episiotomy (OR 0,7)

• mediolateral episiotomy during operative vaginal birth (OR 0,2 – 0.5)

• damp perineal compresses (OR 0.5)

• perineal massage performed antenatally or during the birth (OR 0.5)

The following obstetric measures are not prophylactic, but they also do not increase the risk of high-grade perineal lacerations [5], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34]:

• timing and type of pushing

• water birth

• Ritgenʼs maneuver

• vaginal balloon dilatation during pregnancy

• “hands-on” vs. “hands-off” approach: “hands-off” means that no episiotomy will be carried out but this has no effect on perineal tears.

The following obstetric measures could not yet be definitively assessed:

1. Induction of labor with initiation of uterine contractions

2. Maternal obesity

3. Epidural anesthesia

4. The role of episiotomy with regard to parity and the angle of incision also requires further investigation.

 

MissingLinkText

2  Classification

Perineal lacerations are classified as higher grade when the trauma includes injury to the external anal sphincter [35]:

• Grade 3 perineal tear: injury to the anal sphincter complex, rectal wall is intact

• Grade 4 perineal tear: injury to the anal sphincter complex, injury to the anorectal mucosa

The following subdivision of grade 3 perineal tears is useful [36]:

• 3a: less than 50% thickness of the external anal sphincter is torn

• 3b: more than 50% thickness of the external anal sphincter is torn

• 3c: external and internal anal sphincter are torn

As the internal anal sphincter plays an important role in maintaining the mechanism of continence, every attempt must be made to identify any trauma to the internal anal sphincter in cases of extended perineal trauma [37], [38].

Tearing of the anal epithelium while the internal anal sphincter remains intact (buttonhole tear) is a special type of high-grade perineal laceration. It is rare but if it remains untreated, there is a real risk of developing a rectovaginal fistula. It can be diagnosed postpartum using anal palpation [39], [40], [41]. If the anorectal mucosa has torn while the external anal sphincter remains intact, there is a higher probability of injury to the internal anal sphincter. The conclusive identification of this type of injury is only possible with surgery or using transanal endosonography [42], [43].

 

MissingLinkText

3  Diagnosis

Consensus-based recommendation 3.E2
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
In cases where the extent of injury is not clear, an experienced physician with specialist expertise (preferably a specialist for gynecology and obstetrics or a consultant with coloproctological expertise) must be called in.

Consensus-based recommendation 3.E3
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
If there is any doubt, the diagnosis should be high-grade perineal tear.

After every vaginal birth, a 3rd and 4th degree perineal tear must be excluded by careful initial inspection and/or palpation by the obstetrician and/or the midwife. The use of vaginal and anorectal palpation to assess birth trauma is extremely important. Both vaginal and rectal palpation are expressly recommended to assess the extent of injury for any perineal tear which is grade 2 or above.

If it is not possible to exclude a grade 3 perineal tear, an experienced physician with specialist expertise (preferably a specialist for gynecology and obstetrics or a consultant with coloproctological expertise) must be called in to confirm the suspected diagnosis, provide a general classification of the injury (grade 3 or grade 4 perineal tear) as guidance and initiate further action.

 

MissingLinkText

4  Postpartum management

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E4
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Treatment of a grade 3 or 4 perineal tear must be carried out under sufficient regional or general anesthesia to achieve maximum relaxation of the sphincter muscles while ensuring ensure optimal visualization of the area requiring surgery.

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E5
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Grade 3 and 4 perineal tears must be treated in a suitable operating room with sufficient lighting. Appropriate instruments with non-traumatic clamps must be available. The operating surgeon must have an assistant. Completely aseptic conditions may be beneficial in selected cases.

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E6
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
When treating a 3rd or 4th degree perineal tear, the surgical team must include a specialist with sufficient expertise (preferably a specialist for gynecology and obstetrics or a consultant with coloproctological expertise). In exceptional cases, surgery may be delayed for up to 12 hours postpartum to ensure that treatment will be carried out by a specialist.

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E7
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
When treating grade 3 or 4 perineal tears, patients should receive a single perioperative dose of an antibiotic.

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E8
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Atraumatic, slowly absorbable sutures should be used to suture grade 3 or 4 perineal tears.

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E9
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Placement of a bowel stoma must not be carried out during primary surgery of a high-grade perineal tear.

4.1  Preparation

Management of a 3rd or 4th degree perineal care requires general or regional anesthesia to achieve maximum sphincter relaxation and sufficient pain relief. The procedure is carried out under aseptic conditions in an operating room or an equivalent facility with assistants, appropriate instruments and equipment. The patient is placed in the lithotomy position. The surgical team must include a specialist with sufficient experience [44]. However, the number of previous operations does not appear to be relevant with regard to avoiding anal incontinence [45].

In exceptional cases, surgery may be delayed for up to 12 hours postpartum [46]. Adequate documented preoperative informed consent is required unless it is an emergency.

Patients should receive a single perioperative dose of an antibiotic [47].

 

MissingLinkText

4.2  Surgical strategy

1. Identification of additional birth trauma and precise classification of the perineal tear based on a speculum examination and a rectal examination ([Fig. 1]).

Fig. 1 Initial situation (with the kind permission of Dr. Eva Polsterer). [rerif]

1. If necessary, cervical and high vaginal tears must be treated first, working from the inside to the outside, before treating the perineal tear.

2. For 4th degree tears: repair the anorectal epithelium using atraumatic end-to-end 3-0 sutures [48], [49].

3. If the ends of the internal anal sphincter can be identified, the edges should be approximated using atraumatic interrupted mattress sutures, preferably 3-0 sutures [49], [50].

4. The ends of the external anal sphincter must be identified and gripped with Allis clamps.

5. The external anal sphincter must be sutured with atraumatic U-sutures, preferably 2-0 sutures. There is a choice between 2 methods for the repair: an overlapping technique and an end-to-end technique ([Figs. 2] und [3]) [51], [52], [53]. The end-to-end technique should be used if the muscle has not torn completely [45], [54]. The overlapping technique reduces symptoms of fecal urgency and fecal incontinence after 1 year, but after 3 years no differences were found between the two techniques [55]. There is some evidence that using the end-to-end technique reduces the flatulence rate [54]. It is not possible to give a definitive recommendation about the best surgical method. The surgeon should use the method he/she is most familiar with.

Fig. 2 Overlapping technique (with the kind permission of Dr. Eva Polsterer). [rerif]

Fig. 3 End-to-end technique (with the kind permission of Dr. Eva Polsterer). [rerif]

1. The perineum must be repaired layer by layer.

2. Birth injuries must be recorded and an operative report must be written.

Atraumatic slowly absorbable sutures should be used for items 2 – 6. The choice between braided or monofilament sutures is up to the surgeonʼs individual preference [50], [51], [52], [53]. Placement of a bowel stoma is not indicated [56], [57].

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E10
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
For 4th degree perineal tears, the anorectal epithelium should be repaired using an end-to-end technique and atraumatic sutures should be used, preferably 3-0 sutures.

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E11
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
If the ends of the internal anal sphincter can be identified, the edges must be approximated and sutured using atraumatic interrupted mattress sutures, preferably 3-0 sutures.

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E12
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
The end-to-end technique should be used if the external anal sphincter has not torn completely.

Consensus-based recommendation 4.E13
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Neither the end-to-end technique nor the overlapping technique has been found to result in better outcomes following the repair of tears of the external anal sphincter. The surgeon must therefore use the method with which he/she is most familiar.

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

5  The postpartum period

Consensus-based recommendation 5.E14
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
There is no evidence supporting the prophylactic postoperative administration of antibiotics. Postoperative doses of antibiotics may be recommended in selected cases after an individual risk assessment which also takes local contamination and any potentially serious consequences into account.

Consensus-based recommendation 5.E15
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Laxatives should be administered for a period of at least 2 weeks postoperatively.

Consensus-based recommendation 5.E16
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Daily cleaning with running water is recommended, particularly after a bowel movement. Washing can be carried out by rinsing the area or using alternate cold and hot water douches.

Consensus-based recommendation 5.E17
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Sitz baths (with or without additives) and ointments should not be used.

Consensus-based recommendation 5.E18
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Cool pads or cool topical analgesic medication should be used as it may reduce the swelling and thereby have a positive impact on pain.

Consensus-based recommendation 5.E19
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
It is important to ensure that pain therapy is adequate as local pain could lead to urinary and even fecal retention.

Consensus-based recommendation 5.E20
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
No rectal examination should be carried out in cases where the postpartum healing process is uncomplicated.

Consensus-based recommendation 5.E21
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Patients must be informed about the extent of their birth trauma and potential late sequelae. The information must also include information about follow-up care, the actions they should take, and the help that is available. Patients must be informed about the possibility of a longer latency period until the appearance of symptoms of anal incontinence.

5.1  Antibiotics

There is only indirect evidence about the benefit of extended postoperative prophylactic administration of antibiotics [58]. Extended antibiotic prophylaxis (e.g., cephalosporin + metronidazole for 5 days) may be administered after weighing up the risks in each individual case [36].

 

MissingLinkText

5.2  Laxatives

The postoperative use of laxatives is recommended (for pain reduction and to obtain a better functional outcome) [58], [59]. The authors of the guideline recommend the administration of laxatives for a period of at least 2 weeks postoperatively. No laxative therapy should be prescribed if the patient is suffering from diarrhea.

 

MissingLinkText

5.2  Pain therapy and local therapy

Daily cleaning using running water of drinking water quality is recommended, particularly after a bowel movement (e.g., alternating cold and warm douches). There is no evidence supporting the utility of sitz baths with or without additives or the use of wound ointments with special additives.

Cool compresses or cool topical analgesic medication may reduce the swelling and thereby have a positive impact on pain [60].

It is important to ensure that pain therapy is adequate as local pain could lead to urinary or even fecal retention [61].

No rectal examination should be carried out in cases where the postpartum healing process is uncomplicated [50].

The rate of wound complications after 3rd or 4th degree perineal tears (wound infection, dehiscence, repeat surgery, re-admission to hospital) is between 7.3% [62] and 24.6% [63]; smoking and a higher BMI are known to be independent risk factors while antibiotic therapy intrapartum reduces the risk of wound healing disorders [62], [63].

Patients must be informed about the extent of their birth injury as well as potential late sequelae. Patients must be provided with sufficient information about follow-up care, the actions they should take and the help that is available.

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

6  Follow-up care

Consensus-based recommendation 6.E22
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
A gynecological or coloproctological follow-up examination should be carried out after about 3 months and must include a review of the patientʼs medical history, symptoms of anal incontinence, an inspection of the area, and vaginal and rectal palpation.

Consensus-based recommendation 6.E23
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Patients should be referred to physiotherapy to strengthen their pelvic floor musculature.

Consensus-based recommendation 6.E24
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
If symptoms of anal incontinence persist despite carrying out all conservative treatment options, the patient must be referred to a center with the appropriate expertise (anal endosonography, conservative and surgical treatment options).

A gynecological follow-up examination should be carried out around 3 months postpartum. The follow-up examination must at least include the following:

• Review of the patientʼs medical history including questions about the following symptoms of anal incontinence. The incidences of the various symptoms reported at early follow-up examinations after 3rd or 4th degree perineal tears are given in brackets [52], [57], [64] – [67]

  • flatulence incontinence (up to 50%)

  • fecal urgency (26%)

  • liquid stool incontinence (8%)

  • solid stool incontinence (4%)

• Inspection of the affected area

• Vaginal and rectal palpation

• Referral of the patient to physiotherapy to strengthen her pelvic floor musculature. Early biofeedback-supported physiotherapy offers no advantages compared to classic pelvic floor training [68]. In cases with anal incontinence, triple-target therapy (a combination of amplitude modulated medium frequency stimulation and electromyography biofeedback) has been found to offer superior results compared to standard stimulation therapy with electromyography biofeedback [69].

• The patient must be informed about the potential long latency period until the occurrence/worsening of symptoms of anal incontinence [7], [70].

• Counselling with regard to subsequent deliveries

• If the patient continues to have symptoms of anal incontinence, she should be referred to a center with the appropriate expertise (anal endosonography, conservative and surgical treatment options).

 

MissingLinkText

7  Recommendations for subsequent births

Consensus-based recommendation 7.E25
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Women who have a 3rd or 4th degree perineal tear should be offered an elective caesarean section, especially women with persistent symptoms of anal incontinence, reduced sphincter function or suspected fetal macrosomia.

Consensus-based recommendation 7.E26
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
Women wishing to have a spontaneous vaginal birth must be carefully evaluated with regard to their history of potential sequelae of a previous 3rd or 4th degree perineal injury and be informed in detail about the potential risks.

Consensus-based recommendation 7.E27
Expert consensus	Level of consensus +++
The indications for an episiotomy in a woman wishing to have a subsequent pregnancy with a vaginal birth after a previous 3rd or 4th degree perineal tear must very restrictive.

The existing data does not permit any clear recommendations as to the birth mode in future pregnancies. The patient must be informed that, depending on the data source, the risk of a repeat injury to the anal sphincter in a subsequent vaginal birth ranges from non-existent [45], [54], [55] to a sevenfold higher risk [71], [72], [73], [74], [75]; however, more than 95% of women do not suffer a repeat high-grade perineal tear [73], [76].

The risk of perineal laceration increases with increasing birth weight of the baby [71], [72], [73], [74], [75], [76]. It has also been shown that in vaginal births after a previous 3rd or 4th degree perineal tear, the short-term risk of persistent fecal incontinence is higher [77], [78]. The difference was no longer found in long-term studies which covered a period of 5 or more years [79], [80].

Elective caesarean section should be offered to all women who have previously had a grade 3 or grade 4 perineal tear, particularly patients with persistent symptoms of fecal incontinence, reduced sphincter function or suspected fetal macrosomia.

An episiotomy must be carried out restrictively if a woman wishes to have a vaginal delivery in a subsequent pregnancy after a prior 3rd or 4th degree perineal tear [76].

The following approach must be used if the patient wishes to have a vaginal delivery:

• Good communication with the patient

• Perineal “hands-on” support to ensure optimal control of the birth and gradual delivery of the babyʼs head

• Slow delivery of the babyʼs head

• The patient may freely choose the position in which she gives birth; however, once the baby is crowning, the perineal area must be clearly visible

• A mediolateral episiotomy should be performed if required in individual cases [81]

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

Conflict of Interest/Interessenkonflikt

The conflicts of interest of all of the authors are listed in the long version of the guideline./Die Interessenkonflikte der Autoren sind in der Langfassung der Leitlinie aufgelistet.

Acknowledgements

In memoriam Dr. Irmgard “Soni” Kronberger.

• References/Literatur

• 1 Delmarko I, Leitner H, Harrasser L. Bericht Geburtenregister Österreich – Geburtenjahr 2017. 2017. Accessed May 10, 2020 at: https://www.iet.at/page.cfm?vpath=register/geburtenregister
• 2 Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen. Bundesauswertung 2017 (Geburtshilfe). Germany 2017. 2017. Accessed November 05, 2022 at: https://www.dghwi.de/iqtig-basisauswertung-geburtshilfe-2019/
• 3 Dudding TC, Vaizey CJ, Kamm MA. Obstetric anal sphincter injury: incidence, risk factors, and management. Ann Surg 2008; 247: 224-237
• 4 Gurol-Urganci I, Cromwell DA, Edozien LC. et al. Third- and fourth-degree perineal tears among primiparous women in England between 2000 and 2012: time trends and risk factors. BJOG 2013; 120: 1516-1525
• 5 Ekeus C, Nilsson E, Gottvall K. Increasing incidence of anal sphincter tears among primiparas in Sweden: a population-based register study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008; 87: 564-573
• 6 Kettle C, Tohill S. Perineal care. BMJ Clin Evid 2011; 2011: 1401
• 7 Frudinger A, Ballon M, Taylor SA. et al. The natural history of clinically unrecognized anal sphincter tears over 10 years after first vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111: 1058-1064
• 8 Nordenstam J, Altman D, Brismar S. et al. Natural progression of anal incontinence after childbirth. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2009; 20: 1029-1035
• 9 Pollack J, Nordenstam J, Brismar S. et al. Anal incontinence after vaginal delivery: a five-year prospective cohort study. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 104: 1397-1402
• 10 Aasheim V, Nilsen ABV, Reinar LM. et al. Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; (06) CD006672
• 11 Ampt AJ, Ford JB, Roberts CL. et al. Trends in obstetric anal sphincter injuries and associated risk factors for vaginal singleton term births in New South Wales 2001–2009. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2013; 53: 9-16
• 12 Baghestan E, Irgens LM, Bordahl PE. et al. Trends in risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries in Norway. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116: 25-34
• 13 Berggren V, Gottvall K, Isman E. et al. Infibulated women have an increased risk of anal sphincter tears at delivery: a population-based Swedish register study of 250 000 births. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92: 101-108
• 14 Blomberg M. Maternal body mass index and risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury. Biomed Res Int 2014; 2014: 395803
• 15 Brito LG, Ferreira CH, Duarte G. et al. Antepartum use of Epi-No birth trainer for preventing perineal trauma: systematic review. Int Urogynecol J 2015; 26: 1429-1436
• 16 Bulchandani S, Watts E, Sucharitha A. et al. Manual perineal support at the time of childbirth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 2015; 122: 1157-1165
• 17 Carroli G, Mignini L. Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (01) CD000081
• 18 Corrêa Junior MD, Passini Júnior R. Selective Episiotomy: Indications, Techinique, and Association with Severe Perineal Lacerations. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2016; 38: 301-307
• 19 de Vogel J, van der Leeuw-van Beek A, Gietelink D. et al. The effect of a mediolateral episiotomy during operative vaginal delivery on the risk of developing obstetrical anal sphincter injuries. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 206: 404.e1-404.e5
• 20 Elvander C, Ahlberg M, Thies-Lagergren L. et al. Birth position and obstetric anal sphincter injury: a population-based study of 113 000 spontaneous births. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2015; 15: 252
• 21 Garretto D, Lin BB, Syn HL. et al. Obesity May Be Protective against Severe Perineal Lacerations. J Obes 2016; 2016: 9376592
• 22 Groutz A, Hasson J, Wengier A. et al. Third- and fourth-degree perineal tears: prevalence and risk factors in the third millennium. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 204: 347.e1-347.e4
• 23 Hauck YL, Lewis L, Nathan EA. et al. Risk factors for severe perineal trauma during vaginal childbirth: a Western Australian retrospective cohort study. Women Birth 2015; 28: 16-20
• 24 Hollowell J, Pillas D, Rowe R. et al. The impact of maternal obesity on intrapartum outcomes in otherwise low risk women: secondary analysis of the Birthplace national prospective cohort study. BJOG 2014; 121: 343-355
• 25 Jango H, Langhoff-Roos J, Rosthoj S. et al. Modifiable risk factors of obstetric anal sphincter injury in primiparous women: a population-based cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210: 59.e1-59.e6
• 26 Jiang H, Qian X, Carroli G. et al. Selective versus routine use of episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; (02) CD000081
• 27 Kamisan Atan I, Shek KL, Langer S. et al. Does the Epi-No((R)) birth trainer prevent vaginal birth-related pelvic floor trauma? A multicentre prospective randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2016; 123: 995-1003
• 28 Landy HJ, Laughon SK, Bailit JL. et al. Characteristics associated with severe perineal and cervical lacerations during vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117: 627-635
• 29 Laughon SK, Berghella V, Reddy UM. et al. Neonatal and maternal outcomes with prolonged second stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124: 57-67
• 30 Lindholm ES, Altman D. Risk of obstetric anal sphincter lacerations among obese women. BJOG 2013; 120: 1110-1115
• 31 Lund NS, Persson LK, Jango H. et al. Episiotomy in vacuum-assisted delivery affects the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016; 207: 193-199
• 32 Raisanen S, Selander T, Cartwright R. et al. The association of episiotomy with obstetric anal sphincter injury–a population based matched cohort study. PLoS One 2014; 9: e107053
• 33 Simic M, Cnattingius S, Petersson G. et al. Duration of second stage of labor and instrumental delivery as risk factors for severe perineal lacerations: population-based study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2017; 17: 72
• 34 Smith LA, Price N, Simonite V. et al. Incidence of and risk factors for perineal trauma: a prospective observational study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2013; 13: 59
• 35 Cunningham F, Leveno K, Bloom S, Hauth J, Rouse D, Spong C. eds. Williams Obstetrics. 23rd ed.. ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2009
• 36 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Guideline No. 29, Clinical Green Top Guidelines: Management of third- and fourth-degree perineal tears following vaginal delivery. March 2007. Accessed February 26, 2015 at: http://www.rcog.org.uk/guidelines
• 37 Lindqvist PG, Jernetz M. A modified surgical approach to women with obstetric anal sphincter tears by separate suturing of external and internal anal sphincter. A modified approach to obstetric anal sphincter injury. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2010; 10: 51
• 38 Mahony R, Behan M, Daly L. et al. Internal anal sphincter defect influences continence outcome following obstetric anal sphincter injury. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 196: 217.e1-217.e5
• 39 Chew SS, Rieger NA. Transperineal repair of obstetric-related anovaginal fistula. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 44: 68-71
• 40 Rahman MS, Al-Suleiman SA, El-Yahia AR. et al. Surgical treatment of rectovaginal fistula of obstetric origin: a review of 15 yearsʼ experience in a teaching hospital. J Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 23: 607-610
• 41 Rieger N, Perera S, Stephens J. et al. Anal sphincter function and integrity after primary repair of third-degree tear: uncontrolled prospective analysis. ANZ J Surg 2004; 74: 122-124
• 42 Sentovich SM, Blatchford GJ, Rivela LJ. et al. Diagnosing anal sphincter injury with transanal ultrasound and manometry. Dis Colon Rectum 1997; 40: 1430-1434
• 43 Burnett SJ, Spence-Jones C, Speakman CT. et al. Unsuspected sphincter damage following childbirth revealed by anal endosonography. Br J Radiol 1991; 64: 225-227
• 44 Sultan AH. Primary and secondary anal Sphincter Repair. In: Stanton SL, Zimmern PE. eds. Female pelvic reconstructive Surgery. London: Springer; 2003: 149-157
• 45 Scheer I, Thakar R, Sultan AH. Mode of delivery after previous obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS)–a reappraisal?. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2009; 20: 1095-1101
• 46 Nordenstam J, Mellgren A, Altman D. et al. Immediate or delayed repair of obstetric anal sphincter tears-a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2008; 115: 857-865
• 47 Duggal N, Mercado C, Daniels K. et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of postpartum perineal wound complications: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111: 1268-1273
• 48 Briel JW, de Boer LM, Hop WC. et al. Clinical outcome of anterior overlapping external anal sphincter repair with internal anal sphincter imbrication. Dis Colon Rectum 1998; 41: 209-214
• 49 Thakar R, Sultan AH. Management of obstetric anal sphincter injury. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 5: 72-78
• 50 Sultan AH, Monga AK, Kumar D. et al. Primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter rupture using the overlap technique. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 318-323
• 51 Farrell SA, Gilmour D, Turnbull GK. et al. Overlapping compared with end-to-end repair of third- and fourth-degree obstetric anal sphincter tears: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116: 16-24
• 52 Fernando R, Sultan AH, Kettle C. et al. Methods of repair for obstetric anal sphincter injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (03) CD002866
• 53 Fernando RJ, Sultan AH, Kettle C. et al. Repair techniques for obstetric anal sphincter injuries: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107: 1261-1268
• 54 Priddis H, Dahlen HG, Schmied V. et al. Risk of recurrence, subsequent mode of birth and morbidity for women who experienced severe perineal trauma in a first birth in New South Wales between 2000–2008: a population based data linkage study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2013; 13: 89
• 55 Edwards H, Grotegut C, Harmanli OH. et al. Is severe perineal damage increased in women with prior anal sphincter injury?. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2006; 19: 723-727
• 56 Clark CL, Wilkinson KH, Rihani HR. et al. Peri-operative management of patients having external anal sphincter repairs: temporary prevention of defaecation does not improve outcomes. Colorectal Dis 2001; 3: 238-244
• 57 Hasegawa H, Yoshioka K, Keighley MR. Randomized trial of fecal diversion for sphincter repair. Dis Colon Rectum 2000; 43: 961-964 discussion 964–965
• 58 Kirss J, Pinta T, Bockelman C. et al. Factors predicting a failed primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injury. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016; 95: 1063-1069
• 59 Mahony R, Behan M, OʼHerlihy C. et al. Randomized, clinical trial of bowel confinement vs. laxative use after primary repair of a third-degree obstetric anal sphincter tear. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47: 12-17
• 60 East CE, Begg L, Henshall NE. et al. Local cooling for relieving pain from perineal trauma sustained during childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; (05) CD006304
• 61 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologistsʼ Committee on Practice Bulletins–Obstetrics. Practice Bulletin No. 165: Prevention and Management of Obstetric Lacerations at Vaginal Delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 128: e1-e15
• 62 Stock L, Basham E, Gossett DR. et al. Factors associated with wound complications in women with obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS). Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208: 327.e1-327.e6
• 63 Lewicky-Gaupp C, Leader-Cramer A, Johnson LL. et al. Wound complications after obstetric anal sphincter injuries. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125: 1088-1093
• 64 Fitzpatrick M, Behan M, OʼConnell PR. et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing primary overlap with approximation repair of third-degree obstetric tears. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 183: 1220-1224
• 65 Garcia V, Rogers RG, Kim SS. et al. Primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter laceration: a randomized trial of two surgical techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192: 1697-1701
• 66 Malouf AJ, Norton CS, Engel AF. et al. Long-term results of overlapping anterior anal-sphincter repair for obstetric trauma. Lancet 2000; 355: 260-265
• 67 Williams A, Adams EJ, Tincello DG. et al. How to repair an anal sphincter injury after vaginal delivery: results of a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2006; 113: 201-207
• 68 Peirce C, Murphy C, Fitzpatrick M. et al. Randomised controlled trial comparing early home biofeedback physiotherapy with pelvic floor exercises for the treatment of third-degree tears (EBAPT Trial). BJOG 2013; 120: 1240-1247 discussion 1246
• 69 Schwandner T, Konig IR, Heimerl T. et al. Triple target treatment (3 T) is more effective than biofeedback alone for anal incontinence: the 3 T-AI study. Dis Colon Rectum 2010; 53: 1007-1016
• 70 Poen AC, Felt-Bersma RJ, Dekker GA. et al. Third degree obstetric perineal tears: risk factors and the preventive role of mediolateral episiotomy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 104: 563-566
• 71 Baghestan E, Irgens LM, Bordahl PE. et al. Risk of recurrence and subsequent delivery after obstetric anal sphincter injuries. BJOG 2012; 119: 62-69
• 72 Elfaghi I, Johansson-Ernste B, Rydhstroem H. Rupture of the sphincter ani: the recurrence rate in second delivery. BJOG 2004; 111: 1361-1364
• 73 Harkin R, Fitzpatrick M, OʼConnell PR. et al. Anal sphincter disruption at vaginal delivery: is recurrence predictable?. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 109: 149-152
• 74 Payne TN, Carey JC, Rayburn WF. Prior third- or fourth-degree perineal tears and recurrence risks. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1999; 64: 55-57
• 75 Peleg D, Kennedy CM, Merrill D. et al. Risk of repetition of a severe perineal laceration. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93: 1021-1024
• 76 Basham E, Stock L, Lewicky-Gaupp C. et al. Subsequent pregnancy outcomes after obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS). Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 2013; 19: 328-332
• 77 Bek KM, Laurberg S. Risks of anal incontinence from subsequent vaginal delivery after a complete obstetric anal sphincter tear. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 724-726
• 78 Fynes M, Donnelly V, Behan M. et al. Effect of second vaginal delivery on anorectal physiology and faecal continence: a prospective study. Lancet 1999; 354: 983-986
• 79 Faltin DL, Otero M, Petignat P. et al. Womenʼs health 18 years after rupture of the anal sphincter during childbirth: I. Fecal incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 194: 1255-1259
• 80 Sze EH. Anal incontinence among women with one versus two complete third-degree perineal lacerations. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005; 90: 213-217
• 81 Laine K, Skjeldestad FE, Sandvik L. et al. Incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries after training to protect the perineum: cohort study. BMJ Open 2012; 2: e001649

Publication History

Received: 17 August 2022

Accepted after revision: 23 August 2022

Article published online:
07 December 2022