Anal Sphincter InjuryNCT02356237
The Effect of Episiotomy on Maternal and Fetal Outcomes (EPITRIAL)
A study testing No episiotomy in people with Anal Sphincter Injury, run by Lena Sagi-Dain at 1 site in Israel.
Trial summary
This study is aimed to evaluate the influence of episiotomy on various maternal and neonatal outcomes. Half of the participants will undergo selective episiotomy (according to routine delivery management at the particular hospital), while the other half will not undergo epitiotomy at all. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 50 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Anal Sphincter Injury
- What is being tested?
- No episiotomy
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 676 participants
- Where
- 1 siteIsrael
- Study dates
- Jun 2015to 6 May 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 50 years
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Women in labor, or women scheduled for induction of labor, or women attending for a routine follow-up examination during third trimester of pregnancy.
- First vaginal delivery
- Singleton pregnancy above 34 gestational weeks
- Vertex presentation
- Women who are able to understand and sign the informed consent forms.
Who cannot join
- Absolute contraindications for vaginal delivery (e.g. placenta previa, fetal macrosomia above 4.5 kg, genital herpes)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: The Effect of Episiotomy on Advanced Perineal Tears and Other Maternal and Fetal Outcomes - Randomized Controlled Multicentric Trial (EPITRIAL)
This study is aimed to evaluate the influence of episiotomy on various maternal and neonatal outcomes. Half of the participants will undergo selective episiotomy (according to routine delivery management at the particular hospital), while the other half will not undergo epitiotomy at all.
Our hypothesis is that no differences in maternal and neonatal outcomes will be demonstrated between these two groups.
Read the detailed description
Episiotomy is one of the most prevalent surgical interventions at the delivery room, ranging in frequency from about 10% and up to 75%. The presumed benefits of this procedure include prevention of advanced (3rd and 4th degree) perineal tears, facilitation of fetal distress, easier suturing compared to that of spontaneous perineal tears, decreased postpartum pelvic organ injury including reduced risk of urinary and anal incontinence, and facilitation of labor in cases of shoulder dystocia. However, the cumulative evidence in the recent decades strongly points to the lack of episiotomy efficiency. Moreover, many studies indicate that episiotomy may be associated with increased maternal morbidity in terms of postpartum bleeding and pain, urinary incontinence and severe perineal tears. Cochrane Collaboration meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has shown that selective episiotomy significantly decreases the risk of advanced perineal tears (relative risk of 0.67) and the overall need for perineal suturing (relative risk of 0.71), compared to routine episiotomy use. In addition, there is no uniform definition for the indications for episiotomy performance.
In accordance with literature evidence, we hypothesized that avoidance of episiotomy is not associated with increased risk of maternal and neonatal complications, compared to selective episiotomy use. Thus, the objective of our study is to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes in the group with no episiotomy performed to selective episiotomy use.
This randomized controlled clinical trial will be conducted in seven Northern public Israeli Hospitals from February 2015 to February 2019.
The following study protocol was constructed using consultation with experienced epidemiologist and several senior obstetricians.
Women fitting the inclusion criteria will receive a detailed explanation about the trial from one of the approved investigators and will carefully read the relevant forms. In case of agreement for participation in the study, informed consent form will be signed.
Each participant will undergo randomization into two groups:
- Control group - in which the decision to perform episiotomy will be based on routine delivery care.
- Study group - in which no episiotomy will be performed. Deviation from protocol and episiotomy performance in this group will be allowed only at the discretion of the obstetrician in charge of the delivery, only in cases of unequivocal benefit to the fetus.
The randomization will be carried out using computer software creating random numbers. Allocation to one of the two groups will be done at second stage of labor by opening of sealed opaque envelopes.
Mediolateral or lateral episiotomy (according to the accepted management in each medical center) will be performed during the crowning stage. The incision will be cut at an angle of 45-60º, for 3-4 cm of length.
Epidural anesthesia during labor will be administered in accordance with patient's request. Artificial rupture of membranes, augmentation of the contractions by oxytocin, the decision to perform vacuum extraction or a cesarean birth will be done at the discretion of the attending accoucher, in accordance with the accepted delivery management.
The following data will be obtained for each participant:
- Demographic and obstetric characteristics, including maternal age, weight, height and race, gestational age and pregnancy complications, clinical and sonographic estimated fetal weight.
- Delivery and neonatal parameters, including oxytocin use for labor augmentation and epidural anesthesia administration.
- Primary and secondary outcome measures (described elsewhere).
Sample size calculation was performed by a certified statistician with an extensive experience in clinical trials. It was based on the assumption that the worldwide rate of advanced perineal tears in the control group is 1.6% (according to the latest data reported at the annual Israeli Maternal and Fetal Medicine society meeting at November 2014), and that the rates of these tears in the study group is 1.072% (based on the above mentioned report of Cochrane Collaboration analysis, demonstrating relative risk of 0.67 with selective vs. routine episiotomy use). Given the confidence level of 95% and power of 80%, the required sample size is 14,842 (i.e. 7,421 women in each group).
A year after the trial initiation an interim analysis will be carried out, calculating the up-to-date rate of advanced perineal tears. Sample size will be recalculated based on this rate. In case of statistically significant difference in the primary outcome measure (advanced perineal tears) with a confidence level of 0.003, discontinuation of the trial will be considered due to demonstrated efficacy. Otherwise, the trial will be continued, and the required confidence level at the final statistical calculations will be 0.049.
At the end of data acquisition, statistical analysis will be carried out. Primary and secondary outcome measures will be compared between the two groups. In addition, the association between episiotomy characteristics (incision angle, length and distance from the initiation point to midperineum) to other outcome measures will be assessed.
Statistical analysis will be performed using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL), in accordance with "intention to treat" concept. Data will be presented to the statistician in a blinded way, as groups "1" and "2", with non-disclosure of the number interpretation. Continuous variables will be presented as mean ± SD and compared using Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney test, as appropriate. Categorical data will be expressed as numbers (percentages) and compared using the Chi square test or Fisher's exact test, when appropriate. Relative risks with 95% confidence intervals will be calculated. A two tailed p<0.05 will be considered statistically significant for all comparisons.
- Conditions
- Anal Sphincter Injury
- Being tested
- No episiotomy
- Keywords
- Episiotomy, Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
No episiotomyOther
Avoidance of episiotomy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| No episiotomy | Experimental | Episiotomy will not be performed in this group. Deviation from protocol (i.e. episiotomy performance) will be allowed only according to the discretion of obstetrician in charge of the delivery, in cases of unequivocal benefit to the fetus. Receives: Other: No episiotomy |
| Selective episiotomy | No intervention | The decision to perform episiotomy in this group will be based on routine delivery care, i.e. indistinguishable from any other delivery not participating in the trial. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Obstetric Anal Sphincter injury
Advanced (3rd and 4th degree) perineal tears, i.e. perineal lacerations involving the anal sphincter, diagnosed by a senior obstetrician
Measured: From the delivery to one hour after delivery
Secondary outcomes (13)
1st and 2nd degree perineal tears
1st and 2nd degree perineal tears i.e. lacerations not involving the anal sphincter), diagnosed by an attending accoucher immediately after delivery. Of note, episiotomy will be considered as a 2nd degree tear.
Measured: From the delivery to one hour after delivery
Duration of the second stage of labor
Time in minutes from full dilatation stage of labor until the delivery of the baby
Measured: From beginning of full dilatation to the delivery of the baby
Postpartum hemorrhage
Excessive vaginal bleeding (above 500 ml according to the subjective evaluation of the attending accoucher, or associated with hemodynamic instability), from the moment of the delivery to one hour after delivery
Measured: From delivery to one hour postpartum
Neonatal Apgar score
One and five minutes Apgar scores
Measured: From the delivery to five minutes after delivery
Cord blood pH
Cord blood pH - if measured
Measured: From the delivery to first two minutes after delivery
Need of any neonatal resuscitation procedures
Any neonatal resuscitation procedures
Measured: From the delivery to one hour after delivery
Admission to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU)
Admission to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU)
Measured: From the delivery to one hour after delivery
Shoulder dystocia
The occurrence of shoulder dystocia, defined as a requirement of obstetrical maneuvers for shoulder delivery, or longer than 60 seconds interval between the delivery of the head to the delivery of the shoulders
Measured: From the delivery of the head to the delivery of the shoulders or longer than 60 seconds interval between the delivery of the head to the delivery of the shoulders
Episiotomy performance parameters (Indication for episiotomy performance)
Indication for episiotomy performance, incision characteristics - i.e. post-suture angle, length and initiation point of the incision, suturing accoucheur profession (midwife/obstetrician) and duration of his/her obstetric experience.
Measured: During suturing (from the delivery to one hour after the delivery)
Characteristics of suturing procedure (The duration of suturing procedure, number of suture packs used during the suturing, subjective grading of suturing difficulty and need for extended suturing in operative room)
The duration of suturing procedure, number of suture packs used during the suturing, subjective grading of suturing difficulty and need for extended suturing in operative room
Measured: During suturing (from the delivery to one hour after the delivery)
Postpartum symptoms two days after the delivery (Perineal pain evaluation using 11 points (0-10) Verbal Numeric Scale, urinary retention, perineal infection, perineal hematoma requiring surgical drainage, symptoms of urinary/anal incontinence)
Perineal pain evaluation using 11 points (0-10) Verbal Numeric Scale, urinary retention (for more than 6 hours after the delivery/urinary catheter extraction), perineal infection, perineal hematoma requiring surgical drainage, symptoms of urinary/anal incontinence
Measured: During the second day after the delivery
Phone-call evaluation two months after the delivery
"Yes or no" questions regarding symptoms of urinary/anal incontinence, perineal complications (infection or dehiscence of perineal scar); timing of resumption of sexual activity; perineal pain and dyspareunia evaluation using 11 points (0-10) Verbal Numeric Scale.
Measured: Two months after the delivery
Phone-call evaluation one year after the delivery (Two questionnaires)
Two questionnaires will be filled: Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12) and Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20)
Measured: One year after the delivery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Feb 2015 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2015
- Primary completion6 May 2018
- Study completion6 May 2018
Why it stopped: Slower than expected recruitment rate, and larger than expected required sample.
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Anal Sphincter InjuryStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 676 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Lena Sagi-Dain
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Bnai Zion Medical Center, Rambam Health Care Campus, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Ziv Medical Center, The Baruch Padeh Medical Center, Poriya, Western Galilee Hospital-Nahariya
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Lena Sagi-Dain, Carmel Medical Center
- Investigators
- Shlomi Sagi, M.D., Principal investigator, Bnai-Zion Medical Center, Haifa, IsraelReuven Keidar, M.D., Principal investigator, Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, IsraelIdo Solt, M.D., Principal investigator, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, IsraelAsnat Walfisch, M.D., Principal investigator, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Hadera, IsraelDmitry Chuyun, M.D., Principal investigator, The Baruch Padeh Medical Center, Poriya, IsraelDavid Peleg, M.D., Principal investigator, Ziv Medical Center, Tzfat, IsraelOleg Shnaider, M.D., Principal investigator, Western Galilee Medical Center, Nahariya, Israel
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02356237
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 125-14BNZ
- Status last verified
- Feb 2020
- First submitted
- 1 Feb 2015
- Last updated
- 5 Feb 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Carroli G, Mignini L. Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21;(1):CD000081. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000081.pub2.
PubMed 19160176Pergialiotis V, Vlachos D, Protopapas A, Pappa K, Vlachos G. Risk factors for severe perineal lacerations during childbirth. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014 Apr;125(1):6-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.09.034. Epub 2014 Jan 9.
PubMed 24529800Sagi-Dain L, Kreinin-Bleicher I, Bahous R, Gur Arye N, Shema T, Eshel A, Caspin O, Gonen R, Sagi S. Is it time to abandon episiotomy use? A randomized controlled trial (EPITRIAL). Int Urogynecol J. 2020 Nov;31(11):2377-2385. doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04332-2. Epub 2020 May 24.
PubMed 32448935
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Feb 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Effect of Episiotomy on Advanced Perineal Tears and Other Maternal and Fetal Outcomes - Randomized Controlled Multicentric Trial (EPITRIAL)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02356237
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 125-14BNZ
- Conditions
- Anal Sphincter Injury
- Keywords
- Episiotomy, Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: Slower than expected recruitment rate, and larger than expected required sample.
- Enrolment
- 676 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Lena Sagi-DainUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Bnai Zion Medical Center, Rambam Health Care Campus, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center, Ziv Medical Center, The Baruch Padeh Medical Center, Poriya, Western Galilee Hospital-Nahariya
- Study start
- Jun 2015
- Primary completion
- 6 May 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 6 May 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 5 Feb 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is aimed to evaluate the influence of episiotomy on various maternal and neonatal outcomes. Half of the participants will undergo selective episiotomy (according to routine delivery management at the particular hospital), while the other half will not undergo epitiotomy at all.
Our hypothesis is that no differences in maternal and neonatal outcomes will be demonstrated between these two groups.
Detailed description
Episiotomy is one of the most prevalent surgical interventions at the delivery room, ranging in frequency from about 10% and up to 75%. The presumed benefits of this procedure include prevention of advanced (3rd and 4th degree) perineal tears, facilitation of fetal distress, easier suturing compared to that of spontaneous perineal tears, decreased postpartum pelvic organ injury including reduced risk of urinary and anal incontinence, and facilitation of labor in cases of shoulder dystocia. However, the cumulative evidence in the recent decades strongly points to the lack of episiotomy efficiency. Moreover, many studies indicate that episiotomy may be associated with increased maternal morbidity in terms of postpartum bleeding and pain, urinary incontinence and severe perineal tears. Cochrane Collaboration meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has shown that selective episiotomy significantly decreases the risk of advanced perineal tears (relative risk of 0.67) and the overall need for perineal suturing (relative risk of 0.71), compared to routine episiotomy use. In addition, there is no uniform definition for the indications for episiotomy performance.
In accordance with literature evidence, we hypothesized that avoidance of episiotomy is not associated with increased risk of maternal and neonatal complications, compared to selective episiotomy use. Thus, the objective of our study is to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes in the group with no episiotomy performed to selective episiotomy use.
This randomized controlled clinical trial will be conducted in seven Northern public Israeli Hospitals from February 2015 to February 2019.
The following study protocol was constructed using consultation with experienced epidemiologist and several senior obstetricians.
Women fitting the inclusion criteria will receive a detailed explanation about the trial from one of the approved investigators and will carefully read the relevant forms. In case of agreement for participation in the study, informed consent form will be signed.
Each participant will undergo randomization into two groups:
- Control group - in which the decision to perform episiotomy will be based on routine delivery care.
- Study group - in which no episiotomy will be performed. Deviation from protocol and episiotomy performance in this group will be allowed only at the discretion of the obstetrician in charge of the delivery, only in cases of unequivocal benefit to the fetus.
The randomization will be carried out using computer software creating random numbers. Allocation to one of the two groups will be done at second stage of labor by opening of sealed opaque envelopes.
Mediolateral or lateral episiotomy (according to the accepted management in each medical center) will be performed during the crowning stage. The incision will be cut at an angle of 45-60º, for 3-4 cm of length.
Epidural anesthesia during labor will be administered in accordance with patient's request. Artificial rupture of membranes, augmentation of the contractions by oxytocin, the decision to perform vacuum extraction or a cesarean birth will be done at the discretion of the attending accoucher, in accordance with the accepted delivery management.
The following data will be obtained for each participant:
- Demographic and obstetric characteristics, including maternal age, weight, height and race, gestational age and pregnancy complications, clinical and sonographic estimated fetal weight.
- Delivery and neonatal parameters, including oxytocin use for labor augmentation and epidural anesthesia administration.
- Primary and secondary outcome measures (described elsewhere).
Sample size calculation was performed by a certified statistician with an extensive experience in clinical trials. It was based on the assumption that the worldwide rate of advanced perineal tears in the control group is 1.6% (according to the latest data reported at the annual Israeli Maternal and Fetal Medicine society meeting at November 2014), and that the rates of these tears in the study group is 1.072% (based on the above mentioned report of Cochrane Collaboration analysis, demonstrating relative risk of 0.67 with selective vs. routine episiotomy use). Given the confidence level of 95% and power of 80%, the required sample size is 14,842 (i.e. 7,421 women in each group).
A year after the trial initiation an interim analysis will be carried out, calculating the up-to-date rate of advanced perineal tears. Sample size will be recalculated based on this rate. In case of statistically significant difference in the primary outcome measure (advanced perineal tears) with a confidence level of 0.003, discontinuation of the trial will be considered due to demonstrated efficacy. Otherwise, the trial will be continued, and the required confidence level at the final statistical calculations will be 0.049.
At the end of data acquisition, statistical analysis will be carried out. Primary and secondary outcome measures will be compared between the two groups. In addition, the association between episiotomy characteristics (incision angle, length and distance from the initiation point to midperineum) to other outcome measures will be assessed.
Statistical analysis will be performed using SPSS software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL), in accordance with "intention to treat" concept. Data will be presented to the statistician in a blinded way, as groups "1" and "2", with non-disclosure of the number interpretation. Continuous variables will be presented as mean ± SD and compared using Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney test, as appropriate. Categorical data will be expressed as numbers (percentages) and compared using the Chi square test or Fisher's exact test, when appropriate. Relative risks with 95% confidence intervals will be calculated. A two tailed p<0.05 will be considered statistically significant for all comparisons.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| No episiotomy | Experimental | Other: No episiotomyEpisiotomy will not be performed in this group. Deviation from protocol (i.e. episiotomy performance) will be allowed only according to the discretion of obstetrician in charge of the delivery, in cases of unequivocal benefit to the fetus. |
| Selective episiotomy | No intervention | –The decision to perform episiotomy in this group will be based on routine delivery care, i.e. indistinguishable from any other delivery not participating in the trial. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 50 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Women in labor, or women scheduled for induction of labor, or women attending for a routine follow-up examination during third trimester of pregnancy.
- First vaginal delivery
- Singleton pregnancy above 34 gestational weeks
- Vertex presentation
- Women who are able to understand and sign the informed consent forms.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Absolute contraindications for vaginal delivery (e.g. placenta previa, fetal macrosomia above 4.5 kg, genital herpes)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| No episiotomyAvoidance of episiotomy | Other | No episiotomy |
Primary outcome
Obstetric Anal Sphincter injury
Time frame: From the delivery to one hour after delivery
Advanced (3rd and 4th degree) perineal tears, i.e. perineal lacerations involving the anal sphincter, diagnosed by a senior obstetrician
13 secondary outcomes
1st and 2nd degree perineal tears
Time frame: From the delivery to one hour after delivery
Duration of the second stage of labor
Time frame: From beginning of full dilatation to the delivery of the baby
Postpartum hemorrhage
Time frame: From delivery to one hour postpartum
Neonatal Apgar score
Time frame: From the delivery to five minutes after delivery
Cord blood pH
Time frame: From the delivery to first two minutes after delivery
Need of any neonatal resuscitation procedures
Time frame: From the delivery to one hour after delivery
Admission to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU)
Time frame: From the delivery to one hour after delivery
Shoulder dystocia
Time frame: From the delivery of the head to the delivery of the shoulders or longer than 60 seconds interval between the delivery of the head to the delivery of the shoulders
Episiotomy performance parameters (Indication for episiotomy performance)
Time frame: During suturing (from the delivery to one hour after the delivery)
Characteristics of suturing procedure (The duration of suturing procedure, number of suture packs used during the suturing, subjective grading of suturing difficulty and need for extended suturing in operative room)
Time frame: During suturing (from the delivery to one hour after the delivery)
Postpartum symptoms two days after the delivery (Perineal pain evaluation using 11 points (0-10) Verbal Numeric Scale, urinary retention, perineal infection, perineal hematoma requiring surgical drainage, symptoms of urinary/anal incontinence)
Time frame: During the second day after the delivery
Phone-call evaluation two months after the delivery
Time frame: Two months after the delivery
Phone-call evaluation one year after the delivery (Two questionnaires)
Time frame: One year after the delivery
Results and safety
The study was stopped early (reason given: Slower than expected recruitment rate, and larger than expected required sample.). Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Feb 2020.
- Background: PubMed 19160176Carroli G, Mignini L. Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21;(1):CD000081. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000081.pub2.
- Background: PubMed 24529800Pergialiotis V, Vlachos D, Protopapas A, Pappa K, Vlachos G. Risk factors for severe perineal lacerations during childbirth. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014 Apr;125(1):6-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.09.034. Epub 2014 Jan 9.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32448935Sagi-Dain L, Kreinin-Bleicher I, Bahous R, Gur Arye N, Shema T, Eshel A, Caspin O, Gonen R, Sagi S. Is it time to abandon episiotomy use? A randomized controlled trial (EPITRIAL). Int Urogynecol J. 2020 Nov;31(11):2377-2385. doi: 10.1007/s00192-020-04332-2. Epub 2020 May 24.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Anal Sphincter Injury
Recruiting
Postpartum Health Trajectories the First Year After Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury and the Impact of a Group-Based Intervention
Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
Iltamiocel Compared to Placebo for Chronic Fecal Incontinence in Females With Obstetric Injury
Fecal Incontinence
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Long-term Pelvic Floor and Sexual Health After Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury in Finland
Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury, Sexual Dysfunction and the Mode of Deliveries
Recruiting
Improving Postpartum Quality of Life Through Enhanced Perineal Care Training
Postpartum Quality of Life, Peripartal Maternal Trauma
Not yet recruiting
Perineal Protection Device for Reducing Perineal Trauma During Vaginal Delivery in First-time Mothers: a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, Perineal Laceration
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Shlomi Sagi, M.D. principal investigator
Bnai-Zion Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
Reuven Keidar, M.D. principal investigator
Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
Ido Solt, M.D. principal investigator
Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing No episiotomy in people with Anal Sphincter Injury, run by Lena Sagi-Dain at 1 site in Israel.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Feb 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Israel. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was stopped early (reason given: Slower than expected recruitment rate, and larger than expected required sample.). Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Obstetric Anal Sphincter injury (time frame: From the delivery to one hour after delivery). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02356237, which also lists 3 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 5 Feb 2020.