Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Episiotomy in Emergency Delivery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Practical Guide to Simulation in Delivery Room Emergencies

  • 574 Accesses

Abstract

Episiotomy is the surgical enlargement of the vaginal opening, in order to increase the diameter of the soft tissues of the vaginal outlet, facilitate delivery, and ideally prevent perineal tears.

Given the risk of complications and the impact of such procedure on postpartum maternal satisfaction and quality of life, the decision to perform episiotomy should be weighted on several factors in order to reduce iatrogenic injuries while maximizing fetal outcomes.

For the lack of clear guidelines, the debate on the best technique, timing, and indication of this procedure is still ongoing leading to confusions and disagree among clinicians.

The aim of this chapter is to critically review the current practice and the supporting evidence on the role of episiotomy in emergency delivery in order to provide physicians with a strong background on surgical techniques, indications, and surgical complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Hauth JC, Rouse DJ, Spong CY. Williams obstetrics. 23rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Clesse C, Lighezzolo-Alnot J, De Lavergne S, Hamlin S, Scheffler M. Socio-historical evolution of the episiotomy practice: a literature review. Women Health. 2019;59(7):760–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2018.1553814. Epub 2019 Jan 7. PMID: 30615591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fodstad K, Staff AC, Laine K. Episiotomy preferences, indication, and classification--a survey among Nordic doctors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95(5):587–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12856. Epub 2016 Feb 25. PMID: 26814151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Muhleman MA, Aly I, Walters A, Topale N, Tubbs RS, Loukas M. To cut or not to cut, that is the question: a review of the anatomy, the technique, risks, and benefits of an episiotomy. Clin Anat. 2017;30(3):362–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.22836. PMID: 28195378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Stedenfeldt M, Pirhonen J, Blix E, Wilsgaard T, Vonen B, Øian P. Episiotomy characteristics and risks for obstetric anal sphincter injuries: a case-control study. BJOG. 2012;119(6):724–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03293.x. Epub 2012 Mar 6. PMID: 22390647; PMCID: PMC3489037.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ginath S, Elyashiv O, Weiner E, Sagiv R, Bar J, Menczer J, Kovo M, Condrea A. The optimal angle of the mediolateral episiotomy at crowning of the head during labor. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(12):1795–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3349-9. Epub 2017 May 5. PMID: 28477150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gonzalez-Díaz E, Fernández Fernández C, Gonzalo Orden JM, Fernández Corona A. Which characteristics of the episiotomy and perineum are associated with a lower risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury in instrumental deliveries. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019;233:127–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.12.019. Epub 2018 Dec 20. PMID: 30594022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Flew JD. Episiotomy. Br Med J. 1944;2(4375):620–3. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.2.4375.620. PMID: 20785743; PMCID: PMC2286687.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Corrêa Junior MD, Passini Júnior R. Selective episiotomy: indications, technique, and association with severe perineal lacerations. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2016;38(6):301–7. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1584942. Epub 2016 Jul 11. PMID: 27399925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cleary-Goldman J, Robinson JN. The role of episiotomy in current obstetric practice. Semin Perinatol. 2003;27(1):3–12. https://doi.org/10.1053/sper.2003.50000. PMID: 12641298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rusavy Z, Karbanova J, Kalis V. Timing of episiotomy and outcome of a non-instrumental vaginal delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95(2):190–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.12814. Epub 2015 Dec 8. PMID: 26563626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kalis V, Karbanova J, Horak M, Lobovsky L, Kralickova M, Rokyta Z. The incision angle of mediolateral episiotomy before delivery and after repair. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2008;103(1):5–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.05.026. Epub 2008 Jul 31. PMID: 18674760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kalis V, Landsmanova J, Bednarova B, Karbanova J, Laine K, Rokyta Z. Evaluation of the incision angle of mediolateral episiotomy at 60 degrees. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;112(3):220–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.09.015. Epub 2011 Jan 17. PMID: 21247571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gordon B, Mackrodt C, Fern E, Truesdale A, Ayers S, Grant A. The Ipswich Childbirth Study: 1. A randomised evaluation of two stage postpartum perineal repair leaving the skin unsutured. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998;105:435–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Fleming N. Can the suturing method make a difference in postpartum, perineal pain? J Nurse Midwif. 1990;35(1):19–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kettle C, Dowswell T, Ismail KM. Continuous and interrupted suturing techniques for repair of episiotomy or second-degree tears. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;11(11):CD000947. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000947.pub3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jovanovic N, Kocijancic D, Terzic M. Current approach to episiotomy: inevitable or unnecessary? Open Med. 2011;6(6):685–90. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11536-011-0088-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Allen RE, Hanson RW Jr. Episiotomy in low-risk vaginal deliveries. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2005;18(1):8–12. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.18.1.8. PMID: 15709058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health (UK). Intrapartum care: care of healthy women and their babies during childbirth. London: RCOG Press; 2007. PMID: 21250397.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Piquard F, Hsiung R, Mettauer M, Schaefer A, Haberey P, Dellenbach P. The validity of fetal heart rate monitoring during the second stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1988;72(5):746–51. PMID: 3140151.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ghi T, Morganelli G, Bellussi F, Rucci P, Giorgetta F, Rizzo N, Frusca T, Pilu G. Cardiotocographic findings in the second stage of labor among fetuses delivered with acidemia: a comparison of two classification systems. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;203:297–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.06.028. Epub 2016 Jul 5. PMID: 27423030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hobson S, Cassell K, Windrim R, Cargill Y. No. 381-Assisted vaginal birth. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019;41(6):870–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2018.10.020. PMID: 31126436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Murphy DJ, Macleod M, Bahl R, Goyder K, Howarth L, Strachan B. A randomised controlled trial of routine versus restrictive use of episiotomy at operative vaginal delivery: a multicentre pilot study. BJOG. 2008;115(13):1695–702. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01960.x; discussion 1702-3. PMID: 19035944.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Gachon B, Fradet Menard C, Pierre F, Fritel X. Does the implementation of a restrictive episiotomy policy for operative deliveries increase the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019;300(1):87–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-019-05174-0. Epub 2019 May 5. PMID: 31056735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Frenette P, Crawford S, Schulz J, Ospina MB. Impact of episiotomy during operative vaginal delivery on obstetrical anal sphincter injuries. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019;41(12):1734–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2019.02.016. Epub 2019 Apr 16. PMID: 31003947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. de Leeuw JW, de Wit C, Kuijken JP, Bruinse HW. Mediolateral episiotomy reduces the risk for anal sphincter injury during operative vaginal delivery. BJOG. 2008;115(1):104–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01554.x. Epub 2007 Nov 12. PMID: 17999693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. van Bavel J, Hukkelhoven CWPM, de Vries C, Papatsonis DNM, de Vogel J, Roovers JWR, Mol BW, de Leeuw JW. The effectiveness of mediolateral episiotomy in preventing obstetric anal sphincter injuries during operative vaginal delivery: a ten-year analysis of a national registry. Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29(3):407–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3422-4. Epub 2017 Jul 18. PMID: 28721483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kudish B, Blackwell S, Mcneeley SG, Bujold E, Kruger M, Hendrix SL, Sokol R. Operative vaginal delivery and midline episiotomy: a bad combination for the perineum. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(3):749–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.06.078. PMID: 16949408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hopwood HG Jr. Shoulder dystocia: fifteen years’ experience in a community hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1982;144(2):162–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(82)90619-6. PMID: 7114124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Chatfield J. ACOG issues guidelines on fetal macrosomia. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Am Fam Physician. 2001;64(1):169–70. PMID: 11456432.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Gherman RB, Chauhan S, Ouzounian JG, Lerner H, Gonik B, Goodwin TM. Shoulder dystocia: the unpreventable obstetric emergency with empiric management guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195(3):657–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2005.09.007. Epub 2006 Apr 21. PMID: 16949396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Gurewitsch ED, Donithan M, Stallings SP, Moore PL, Agarwal S, Allen LM, Allen RH. Episiotomy versus fetal manipulation in managing severe shoulder dystocia: a comparison of outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(3):911–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.06.041. PMID: 15467564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Paris AE, Greenberg JA, Ecker JL, McElrath TF. Is an episiotomy necessary with a shoulder dystocia? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(3):217.e1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.04.006. Epub 2011 Apr 14. PMID: 21620364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Vitner D, Bleicher I, Kadour-Peero E, Lipworth H, Sagi S, Gonen R. Does prenatal identification of fetal macrosomia change management and outcome? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019;299(3):635–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-018-5003-2. Epub 2018 Dec 18. PMID: 30564929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Steiner N, Weintraub AY, Wiznitzer A, Sergienko R, Sheiner E. Episiotomy: the final cut? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012;286(6):1369–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2460-x. Epub 2012 Jul 19. PMID: 22810620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics. Practice bulletin no. 173: fetal macrosomia. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(5):e195–209. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001767. PMID: 27776071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Dietz HP, Pardey J, Murray H. Pelvic floor and anal sphincter trauma should be key performance indicators of maternity services. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(1):29–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2546-z. Epub 2014 Oct 15. PMID: 25315175.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Hartmann K, Viswanathan M, Palmieri R, Gartlehner G, Thorp J Jr, Lohr KN. Outcomes of routine episiotomy: a systematic review. JAMA. 2005;293(17):2141–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.17.2141. PMID: 15870418.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Beischer NA. The anatomical and functional results of mediolateral episiotomy. Med J Aust. 1967;2(5):189–95. PMID: 6057891.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Baksu B, Davas I, Akyol A, Ozgul J, Ezen F. Effect of timing of episiotomy repair on peripartum blood loss. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2008;65(3):169–73. https://doi.org/10.1159/000111138. Epub 2007 Nov 19. PMID: 18025831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kitzinger S, Walters R. Some women’s experience with episiotomy. London: National Childbirth Trust; 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ejegård H, Ryding EL, Sjogren B. Sexuality after delivery with episiotomy: a long-term follow-up. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2008;66(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1159/000113464. Epub 2008 Jan 17. PMID: 18204265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zaami S, Stark M, Beck R, et al. Does episiotomy always equate violence in obstetrics? Routine and selective episiotomy in obstetric practice and legal questions. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2019;23:1847–54.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Pope TM. Legal Briefing: unwanted cesareans and obstetric violence. J Clin Ethics. 2017;28:163–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. WHO. The prevention and elimination of disrespect and abuse during facility-based childbirth WHO/RHR/14.23. World Health Organization; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Parto. “Introdurre il reato di violenza ostetrica”. L’indignazione dei ginecologi sulla proposta di legge. (Italian Gynecologist Association express- es indignation at proposed new law on obstetric violence). Gyneco AOGOI. 2016;(3)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Adriano Zaccagnini. Draft Bill by Italian member of Parliament Adriano Zaccagnini: “Norme per la tutela dei diritti del- la partoriente e del neonato e per la promozione del parto fisiologico” (Norms and safeguards for parturients and newborns towards the fostering of natural delivery); 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Jiang H, Qian X, Carroli G, Garner P. Selective versus routine use of episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;(2):CD000081.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Malvasi A, Trojano G, Tinelli A, Marinelli E, Zaami S. Episiotomy: an informed consent proposal. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2021;34(6):948–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2019.162267752).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Zaami S, Zupi E, Lazzeri L, Centini G, Stark M, Malvasi A, Signore F, Marinelli E. Episiotomy: a medicolegal vicious cycle. Panminerva Med. 2021;63(2):224–31. https://doi.org/10.23736/S0031-0808.20.03946-4. Epub 2020 May 14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Obtaining valid consent. Clinical governance advice No. 6. London: RCOG; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Malvasi A, Zaami S, Tinelli A, Trojano G, Montanari Vergallo G, Marinelli E. Kristeller maneuvers or fundal pressure and maternal/neonatal morbidity: obstetric and judicial literature review. J Matern Fetal Neonat Med. 2019;32(15):2598–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Zaami S, Malvasi A, Marinelli E. Fundal pressure: risk factors in uterine rupture. The issue of liability: complication or malpractice? J Perinat Med. 2018;46(5):567–8. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2018-0070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Youssef A, Brunelli E, Bianchini L, Pilu G. Fundal pressure during the second stage of labor (Kristeller Maneuver): a critical appraisal of its potential role in the modern obstetrics. In: Malvasi A, editor. Intrapartum ultrasonography for labor management. Labor, delivery puerperium. 2nd ed. Cham: Springer Nature AG; 2021. p. 695–702, Chapter 54.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  55. Kamel R. Intrapartum ultrasound and Levator Ani modifications in normal and dystocic labour. In: Malvasi A, editor. Intrapartum ultrasonography for labor management. Labor, delivery puerperium. 2nd ed. Cham: Springer Nature AG; 2021. p. 405–16. Chapter 35.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  56. Crescini C, Ragusa A, Svelato A. Prevention of perineal trauma during vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery. In: Malvasi A, editor. Intrapartum ultrasonography for labor management. Labor, delivery puerperium. 2nd ed. Cham: Springer Nature AG; 2021. p. 743–50. Chapter 58.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  57. Chanrachankul B. The episiotomy and perineal injuries. In: Di Renzo GC, Berghella V, Malvasi A, editors. Good practice and malpractice in labor and delivery. Milan: Edra Editor; 2019. p. 157–64.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Eogan M, Daly L, O’Connell PR, O’Herlihy C. Does the angle of episiotomy affect the incidence of anal sphincter injury? BJOG. 2006;113(2):190–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Aytan H, Tapisiz OL, Tuncay G, Avsar FA. Severe perineal lacerations in nulliparous women and episiotomy type. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005;121(1):46–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Landsmanova J, Bednarova B, Karbanova J, Laine K, Rokyta Z. Evaluation of the incision angle of mediolateral episiotomy at 60 degrees. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;112(3):220–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Revicky V, Nirmal D, Mukhopadhyay S, Morris EP, Nieto JJ. Could a mediolateral episiotomy prevent obstetric anal sphincter injury? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010;150(2):142–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Deryfus JM, Watrelot A. How to prevent litigation in obstetric by informing patients. In: Di Renzo GC, Bergella V, Malvasi A, editors. Good practice and malpractice in labor and delivery. Milan: EDRA Editor; 2019. p. 427–32.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Morano S, Bewley S. Violence and rights in the labor ward. In: Di Renzo GC, Bergella V, Malvasi A, editors. Good practice and malpractice in labor and delivery. Milan: EDRA Editor; 2019. p. 411–24.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Eftekhari Yazdi M, Rad M, Torkmannejad Sabzevari M. Effect of workshop training along with simulation and support of labor practitioners on their attitude and performance in conducting routine episiotomy. J Educ Health Promot. 2019;8:121.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Guler H, Cetin P, Yurtsal ZB, Cesur B, Bekar M, Uçar T, Evcili F, Cetin A. Effect of episiotomy training with beef tongue and sponge simulators on the self-confidence building of midwifery students. Nurse Educ Pract. 2018;30:1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. van Roon Y, Vinayakarao L, Melson L, Percival R, Pathak S, Pradhan A. Comparative study of episiotomy angles achieved by cutting with straight Mayo scissors and the EPISCISSORS-60 in a birth simulation model. Int Urogynecol J. 2017;28(7):1063–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. van Lonkhuijzen L, van Roosmalen J, Zeeman G. Low-cost simulation models for teaching episiotomy/laceration repair and venous cutdown. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;112(3):249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Kim EK, Lovejoy DA, Patterson D, Handa VL. Lessons learned from a review of malpractice litigations involving obstetric anal sphincter injury in the United States. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2020;26(4):249–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Eason E, Feldman P. Much ado about a little cut: is episiotomy worthwhile? Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(4):616–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Pietras J, Taiwo BF. Episiotomy in modern obstetrics--necessity versus malpractice. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2012;21(4):545–50.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Taghizadeh Z, Pourbakhtiar M, Azimi K, Ghadipasha M, Soltani K. Claims about medical malpractices resulting in neonatal and maternal impairment in Iran. J Forensic Legal Med. 2019;66:44–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy

    Maddalena Falagario

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy

    Francesca Greco, Maristella De Padova, Maria Grazia Morena, Tea Palieri, Francesco D’Antonio, Michele Bollino, Felice Sorrentino & Lorenzo Vasciaveo

  3. Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Medical and Surgical Sciences, Riuniti University Hospital, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy

    Luigi Nappi

Authors
  1. Maddalena Falagario
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesca Greco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maristella De Padova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria Grazia Morena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tea Palieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Francesco D’Antonio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michele Bollino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Felice Sorrentino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Lorenzo Vasciaveo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Luigi Nappi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maddalena Falagario .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Professor of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy

    Gilda Cinnella

  2. Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Riuniti University Hospital, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy

    Renata Beck

  3. Department of Biomedical and Human Oncological Science (DIMO) Unit of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Antonio Malvasi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Falagario, M. et al. (2023). The Role of Episiotomy in Emergency Delivery. In: Cinnella, G., Beck, R., Malvasi, A. (eds) Practical Guide to Simulation in Delivery Room Emergencies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10067-3_59

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10067-3_59

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-10066-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-10067-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation