Manika Agarwal and Sharat Agarwal*

Professor, Northeastern Indira Gandhi Regional Institute of Health and Medical sciences (NEIGRIHMS), Shillong, India

*Corresponding Author: Sharat Agarwal, Professor, Northeastern Indira Gandhi Regional Institute of Health and Medical sciences (NEIGRIHMS), Shillong, India.

Received: June 26, 2023; Published: July 19, 2023

Abstract

Instrumental delivery, when done correctly in an appropriately chosen patient, has an excellent maternal and fetal outcome. It helps reduce second-stage caesarean section rates, which is a complex surgery with a grave effect on the future obstetric life of the patient. However, with the risks of medicolegal litigation in obstetrics practice.

Many obstetricians are comfortable performing a caesarean section as an intervention of choice in 2^nd stage of labour, to avoid unforeseen complications due to a failed instrumental delivery.

Method: we have aimed to analyze instrumental delivery rates and associated outcomes in this retrospective study of 2 years in a tertiary care institute in North-eastern India, to assess the current trends in obstetrics.

Result: We found that 5.39% of total deliveries over a period of 2 years were instrumental deliveries. Most patients were primigravida and vacuum deliveries were used more preferably over forceps delivery. Episiotomy was used in 91% of cases with 3^rd-degree perineal tear in 3cases associated with forceps delivery. Also, only12% of babies had NICU admission with uneventful recovery.

Conclusion: Thus, Instrumental delivery is an essential obstetric skill. When applied correctly on a rightly chosen patient, it has a high success rate and reduces the risk of 2^nd stage cases are an section. Although current trends in obstetrics are limiting its role for fear of litigation in view of a failed instrumental delivery, this skill must be encouraged and protocols of instrumental delivery in the operation theatre must be encouraged in difficult cases.

 Keywords: Instrumental Vaginal Delivery; Vacuum Delivery; Forceps Delivery; Caesarean delivery; Fetal Complications

References

1. Operative Vaginal Birth: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 219”. Obstetrics and Gynecology 4 (2020): e149-e159.
2. Polkowski M., et al. “Neonatal and Maternal Short-Term Outcome Parameters in Instrument-Assisted Vaginal Delivery Compared to Second Stage Caesarean Section in Labour: A Retrospective11-Year Analysis”. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation 1 (2018): 90-98.
3. Tan PS., et al. “Comparison of Caesarean sections and instrumental deliveries at full cervical dilatation: a retrospective review”. Singapore Medical Journal 2 (2019): 75-79.
4. Pettersen-Dahl A., et al. “Maternal body mass index as a predictor for delivery method”. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2 (2018): 212-218.
5. Sebire NJ., et al. “Maternal obesity and pregnancy outcome: a study of 287,213 pregnancies in London”. International Journal of Obesity and Related Metabolic Disorders 8 (2001): 1175-1182.
6. Usha Kiran TS., et al. “Outcome of pregnancy in a woman with an increased body mass index”. BJOG 6 (2005): 768-772.
7. Bofill JA., et al. “Forceps and vacuum delivery: a survey of North American residency programs”. Obstetrics and Gynecology 4Pt1 (1996): 622-625.
8. Patel RR and Murphy DJ. “Forceps delivery in modern obstetric practice”. BMJ 7451 (2004): 1302-1305.
9. Thomas J and Paranjothy S. “The national sentinel caesarean section audit report”. National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report (2001).
10. Towner D., et al. “Effect of mode of delivery in nulliparous women on neonatal intracranial injury”. The New England Journal of Medicine 23 (1999): 1709-1714.
11. Shihadeh A and Al-Najdawi W. “Forceps or vacuum extraction: a comparison of maternal and neonatal morbidity”. EMHJ Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal 1-2 (2001): 106-114.
12. Johnson JH., et al. “Immediate maternal and neonatal effects of forceps and vacuum-assisted deliveries”. Obstetrics and Gynecology 3 (2004): 513-518.
13. Combs CA., et al. “Risk factors for third-degree and fourth-degreeperineal lacerations in forceps and vacuum deliveries”. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1Pt1 (1990): 100-104.
14. Revah A., et al. “Failed trial of vacuum or forceps--maternal andfetal outcome”. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1 Pt 1 (1997): 200-204.
15. Murphy DJ., et al. “Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists”. Assisted Vaginal Birth: Green-top Guideline No. 26”. BJOG9 (2020): e70-e112.

Citation

Citation: Manika Agarwal and Sharat Agarwal. “ID-ENDS (Instrumental Delivery-Experience in Northeastern India, Descriptive Study)”.Acta Scientific Medical Sciences 7.8 (2023): 158-161.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2023 Manika Agarwal and Sharat Agarwal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.