Systematic review shows defibulation after FGM/C has obstetric benefits; effect of reconstruction is uncertain.

There are some data on women's motivations for surgery for FGM/C-related concerns, but little is known about whether women are satisfied with the surgery, and experiences appear mixed. Berg RC, Taraldsen S, Said MA, et al. Reasons for and Experiences With Surgical Interventions for Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C): A Systematic Review. J Sex Med 2017;14:977-990.

Introduction The impact of female genital mutilation/cutting on obstetric outcomes in high‐income countries is not clear. In general, women with female genital mutilation/cutting type 3 (infibulation) seem to be most at risk of adverse outcomes such as cesarean section. Deinfibulation is recommended to prevent obstetric complications. Whether the timing of this procedure affects the complication risk is not known. The aims of this study were, first, to examine the association between female genital mutilation/cutting and the risk of cesarean section in Norway, and, second, whether the timing of deinfibulation affected the cesarean section risk. Material and methods This was a historical cohort study of nulliparous Somali‐born women who gave birth in Norway between 1990 and 2014. The Medical Birth Registry of Norway identified the women. Data were collected from medical records at 11 participating birth units. The exposures were female genital mutilation/cutting status and deinfibulation before pregnancy, during pregnancy, or no deinfibulation before labor onset. The main outcome was odds ratio (OR) of cesarean section. Type of cesarean section, primary indications, and neonatal outcomes were secondary outcomes. Results Women with female genital mutilation/cutting type 3 had lower risk of cesarean section compared with women with no female genital mutilation/cutting (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33‐0.89 P = .02). Among the 1504 included women, the cesarean section rate was 28.0% and the proportion of emergency operations was 92.9%. Fetal distress was the primary indication in approximately 50% of cases, across the groups with different female genital mutilation/cutting status. Women who had no deinfibulation before labor onset had lower risk of cesarean section compared with those who underwent deinfibulation before or during pregnancy (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46‐0.88 P = .01). Conclusions High risk of cesarean section in Somali nulliparous women was not related to the type of female genital mutilation/cutting in the present study. Deinfibulation before labor did not protect against cesarean section. Our findings indicate that nulliparous Somali women are at high risk of intrapartum complications. Future research should focus on measures to reduce maternal morbidity and on how timing of deinfibulation affects the outcomes of vaginal births.

Introduction:A greater risk of obstetric anal sphincter injury has been reported among African migrants in several host countries compared with the general population. To what degree female genital mutilation/cutting affects this risk is not clear. In infibulated women, deinfibulation prevents anal sphincter injury. Whether the timing of deinfibulation affects the risk, is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the risks of anal sphincter injury associated with female genital mutilation/cutting and timing of deinfibulation in Norway, and to compare the rates of anal sphincter injury in Somaliborn women and the general population. Material and methods:In a historical cohort study, nulliparous Somali-born women who had a vaginal birth in the period 1990-2014 were identified by the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and data collected from medical records. Exposures were female genital mutilation/cutting status and deinfibulation before labor, during labor or no deinfibulation. The main outcome was obstetric anal sphincter injuries.Results: Rates of obstetric anal sphincter injury did not differ significantly by female genital mutilation/cutting status (type 1-2: 10.2%, type 3: 11.3%, none: 15.2% P = 0.17). The total rate of anal sphincter injury was 10.3% compared to 5.0% among nulliparous women in the general Norwegian population. Women who underwent deinfibulation during labor had a lower risk than women who underwent deinfibulation before labor (odds ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.86, P = 0.01). Conclusions:The high rate of anal sphincter injury in Somali nulliparous women was not related to type of female genital mutilation/cutting. Deinfibulation during labor protected against anal sphincter injury, whereas deinfibulation before labor was associated with a doubled risk. Deinfibulation before labor should not be routinely recommended during pregnancy.