Forceps Compared With Vacuum: Rates of Neonatal and Maternal Morbidity

OBJECTIVE: To compare perinatal outcomes between forceps- and vacuum-assisted deliveries. Our hypothesis was that the force vectors achieved in forceps delivery will lead to fewer shoulder dystocias, but greater perineal lacerations. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 4,120 term, cephalic, singleton, nonrotational operative vaginal deliveries at a single institution. Outcomes examined included rates of neonatal trauma, shoulder dystocia, and perineal lacerations. Potential confounders, including maternal age, birthweight, ethnicity, parity, station at delivery, episiotomy, attending physician, anesthesia, and length of labor, were controlled for using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among the 2,075 (50.4%) forceps- and 2,045 (49.6%) vacuum-assisted deliveries, the rate of shoulder dystocia was lower among women undergoing forceps delivery (1.5% compared with 3.5%, P < .001), as was the rate of cephalohematoma (4.5% compared with 14.8%, P < .001), whereas the rate of third- or fourth-degree perineal laceration was higher (36.9% compared with 26.8%, P < .001). These differences in perinatal complications persisted when controlling for the confounders listed above. The adjusted odds ratio for shoulder dystocia was 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20–0.57), for cephalohematoma was 0.25 (95% CI 0.19–0.33), and for third- or fourth-degree lacerations was 1.79 (95% CI 1.52–2.10) when comparing forceps to vacuum. CONCLUSION: Vacuum-assisted vaginal birth is more often associated with shoulder dystocia and cephalohematoma. Forceps delivery is more often associated with third- and fourth-degree perineal lacerations. These differences in complications rates should be considered among other factors when determining the optimal mode of delivery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-2

[1]  B. Menon,et al.  Vacuum extraction versus forceps for assisted vaginal delivery. , 2010, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[2]  M. Glezerman,et al.  Maternal and neonatal effects of forceps versus vacuum operative vaginal delivery , 2005, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[3]  Bijal A Balasubramanian,et al.  Operative vaginal delivery and neonatal and infant adverse outcomes: population based retrospective analysis , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[4]  D. Maulik,et al.  Immediate Maternal and Neonatal Effects of Forceps and Vacuum-Assisted Deliveries , 2004, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[5]  E. Capeless,et al.  Operative vaginal delivery: a comparison of forceps and vacuum for success rate and risk of rectal sphincter injury. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[6]  L. Kozak,et al.  U.S. trends in obstetric procedures, 1990-2000. , 2002, Birth.

[7]  R. Mesleh,et al.  Comparison of maternal and infant outcomes between vacuum extraction and forceps deliveries. , 2002, Saudi medical journal.

[8]  M. Carnegie,et al.  Operative delivery during labour: trends and predictive factors. , 2002, Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology.

[9]  Dena Towner,et al.  Effect of mode of delivery in nulliparous women on neonatal intracranial injury. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  J. N. Martin,et al.  A randomized prospective trial of the obstetric forceps versus the M-cup vacuum extractor. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[11]  G. Rydén,et al.  Forceps or Vacuum Extraction? A Comparison of Effects on the Newborn Infant , 1986, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[12]  T. Malmstrom Vacuum extractor, an obstetrical instrument. , 1954, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica. Supplement.