Maternal infibulation and obstetrical outcome in Djibouti

Abstract

Infibulation was not related with excess perinatal morbidity in this setting with a very high prevalence of female genital mutilation, but future research should concentrate on the relation between infibulation and meconium.

Trend in female genital mutilation and its associated adverse birth outcomes: A 10-year retrospective birth registry study in Northern Tanzania

“…Women with FGM have 32% higher odds of delivering a baby with low Apgar score compared to those women without FGM. Our finding is in contrast with that from the multi-centre study done in 6 African countries [6] and that which was done in Djibouti [20]. This difference in results might be due to difference in study design.…”

The effectiveness of surgical interventions for women with FGM/C: a systematic review

“…We detected no statistically significant differences between antenatal defibulation and intrapartum defibulation, but found a favourable effect of defibulation relative to none with respect to caesarean section and perineal tears. We note that none of the studies, except one, stratified or controlled for parity (or other potential confounding factors, such as anaesthesia), and thus these results should be interpreted with caution. There is very little evidence on the immediate, short‐, and long‐term effects of defibulation on other health outcomes.…”

“…In this communication, in line with recommendations, we primarily present the results from the studies deemed to have the highest internal validity with respect to the question of benefit and harm. These were 13 comparative studies with 4743 participants: four retrospective case series with two or more groups, two prospective cohort studies with two or more groups, one controlled before‐and‐after study, and six uncontrolled before‐and‐after studies . The remaining 49 studies were non‐comparative studies (case reports, case series, cross‐sectional studies; Table S1).…”

“…As seen in Table S5, the five studies that examined defibulation versus no defibulation measured few identical outcomes, and found few significant differences between the groups. In two studies the no‐defibulation group consisted of women with FGM/C types I and II, and thus these studies were not included in the meta‐analyses. The meta‐analyses indicated statistically significant differences in caesarean section, second‐degree tear, third‐degree tear, and fourth‐degree tear (Figure ).…”

Reasons for and Experiences with Surgical Interventions for Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C): A Systematic Review

“…There were two qualitative studies. Four case series, all retrospective, compared at least two groups of women who had been subjected to FGM/C in which at least one group had received an intervention, 27,34,83,86 as did the two cohort studies 42,75 and the controlled before-and-after study. 95 Another six studies provided pre-and post-data on one group of women who received a surgical intervention.…”