Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 761

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Third degree obstetric anal sphincter tears: risk factors and outcome of primary repair

Open access
Sultan, A H, Kamm, M A, Hudson, C N, Bartram, C I·1994·BMJ

Abstract

Objectives To determine (i) risk factors in the development of third degree obstetric tears and (ii) the success of primary sphincter repair. Design (i) Retrospective analysis of obstetric variables in 50 women who had sustained a third degree tear, compared with the remaining 8553 vaginal deliveries during the same period. (ii) Women who had sustained a third degree tear and had primary sphincter repair and control subjects were interviewed and investigated with anal endosonography, anal manometry, and pudendal nerve terminal motor latency measurements Setting : Antenatal clinic in teaching hospital in inner London. Subjects (i) All women (n=8603) who delivered vaginally over a 31 month period. (ii) 34 women who sustained a third degree tear and 88 matched controls. Main outcome measures : Obstetric risk factors, defaecatory symptoms, sonographic sphincter defects, and pudendal nerve damage. Results - (i) Factors significantly associated with development of a third degree tear were: forceps delivery (50% v 7% in controls; P=0.00001), primiparous delivery (85% v 43%; P=0.00001), birth weight >4 kg (P=0.00002), and occipitoposterior position at delivery (P=0.003). No third degree tear occurred during 351 vacuum extractions. Eleven of 25 (44%) women who were delivered without instruments and had a third degree tear did so despite a posterolateral episiotomy. (ii) Anal incontinence or faecal urgency was present in 16 women with tears and 11 controls (47% v 13%;20P=0.00001). Sonographic sphincter defects were identified in 29 with tears and 29 controls (85% v 33%; P=0.00001). Every symptomatic patient had persistent combined internal and external sphincter defects, and these were associated with significantly lower anal pressures. Pudendal nerve terminal motor latency measurements were not significantly different. Conclusions Vacuum, extraction is associated with fewer third degree tears than forceps delivery. An episiotomy does not always prevent a third degree tear. Primary repair is inadequate in most women who sustain third degree tears, most having residual sphincter defects and about half experiencing anal incontinence, which is caused by persistent mechanical sphincter disruption rather than pudendal nerve damage. Attention should be directed towards preventive obstetric practice and surgical techniques of repair.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.308.6933.887

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 761

Metadata

Authors
Sultan, A. H., Kamm, M. A., Hudson, C. N., & Bartram, C. I.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1994-04-02
Volume
308
Issue
6933
Pages
887-891
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2023315209
Cited by
761
References
0
FWCI
11.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Third degree obstetric anal sphincter tears: risk factors and outcome of primary repair. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.308.6933.887
The paper
Sultan, A. H., Kamm, M. A., Hudson, C. N., & Bartram, C. I. (1994). Third degree obstetric anal sphincter tears: risk factors and outcome of primary repair. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.308.6933.887

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.