Prior Ultrasound-Indicated Cerclage: Comparison of Cervical Length Screening or History-Indicated Cerclage in the Next Pregnancy

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes of women with prior ultrasound-indicated cerclage, who in their subsequent pregnancy were either followed by transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening or received a planned history-indicated cerclage. METHODS: Multicenter cohort study of singleton gestations with a prior ultrasound-indicated cerclage performed from 1994 to 2014. We evaluated three pregnancies in the study participants: first pregnancy with prior spontaneous preterm birth at less than 37 weeks of gestation; second pregnancy with ultrasound-indicated cerclage for cervical length 25 mm or less; and the third index pregnancy managed with either transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening with ultrasound-indicated cerclage for cervical length 25 mm or less or planned history-indicated cerclage. The primary outcome was incidence of spontaneous preterm birth at less than 37 weeks of gestation. We planned a subgroup analysis for women who delivered at less than 32 weeks of gestation compared with 32 weeks of gestation or greater in their prior ultrasound-indicated cerclage pregnancy. RESULTS: Of 102 singleton gestations included, 38 (37.3%) were followed with transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening and 64 (62.7%) underwent history-indicated cerclage. Of 38 women in the transvaginal ultrasound group, 18 (47.4%) underwent ultrasound-indicated cerclage for cervical length 25 mm or less. After adjusting for confounders, the rate of spontaneous preterm birth at less than 37 weeks of gestation was similar between transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening and history-indicated cerclage groups (36.8% compared with 43.8%; adjusted odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.47-1.45). Secondary outcomes were also similar in both groups. All women (n=7) who delivered at less than 32 weeks of gestation in their prior pregnancy and subsequently had transvaginal ultrasound screening received ultrasound-indicated cerclage in the index pregnancy compared with only 35.5% of women who delivered at 32 weeks of gestation or greater in their prior pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Women with prior ultrasound-indicated cerclage have similar outcomes if they receive either transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening with ultrasound-indicated cerclage for cervical length 25 mm or less or planned history-indicated cerclage in the subsequent pregnancy. Less than 50% of the transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening group require a repeat ultrasound-indicated cerclage in the subsequent pregnancy

Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnancy.

Cervical cerclage is a well-known surgical procedure carried out during pregnancy. It involves positioning of a suture (stitch) around the neck of the womb (cervix), aiming to give mechanical support to the cervix and thereby reduce risk of preterm birth. The effectiveness and safety of this procedure remains controversial. This is an update of a review last published in 2012.To assess whether the use of cervical stitch in singleton pregnancy at high risk of pregnancy loss based on woman's history and/or ultrasound finding of 'short cervix' and/or physical exam improves subsequent obstetric care and fetal outcome.We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (30 June 2016) and reference lists of identified studies.We included all randomised trials of cervical suturing in singleton pregnancies. Cervical stitch was carried out when the pregnancy was considered to be of sufficiently high risk due to a woman's history, a finding of short cervix on ultrasound or other indication determined by physical exam. We included any study that compared cerclage with either no treatment or any alternative intervention. We planned to include cluster-randomised studies but not cross-over trials. We excluded quasi-randomised studies. We included studies reported in abstract form only.Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We resolved discrepancies by discussion. Data were checked for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.This updated review includes a total of 15 trials (3490 women); three trials were added for this update (152 women). Cerclage versus no cerclageOverall, cerclage probably leads to a reduced risk of perinatal death when compared with no cerclage, although the confidence interval (CI) crosses the line of no effect (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.04; 10 studies, 2927 women; moderate quality evidence). Considering stillbirths and neonatal deaths separately reduced the numbers of events and sample size. Although the relative effect of cerclage is similar, estimates were less reliable with fewer data and assessed as of low quality (stillbirths RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.75; 5 studies, 1803 women; low quality evidence; neonatal deaths before discharge RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.39; 6 studies, 1714 women; low quality evidence). Serious neonatal morbidity was similar with and without cerclage (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.18; 6 studies, 883 women; low-quality evidence). Pregnant women with and without cerclage were equally likely to have a baby discharged home healthy (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.06; 4 studies, 657 women; moderate quality evidence).Pregnant women with cerclage were less likely to have preterm births compared to controls before 37, 34 (average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.89; 9 studies, 2415 women; high quality evidence) and 28 completed weeks of gestation.Five subgroups based on clinical indication provided data for analysis (history-indicated; short cervix based on one-off ultrasound in high risk women; short cervix found by serial scans in high risk women; physical exam-indicated; and short cervix found on scan in low risk or mixed populations). There were too few trials in these clinical subgroups to make meaningful conclusions and no evidence of differential effects. Cerclage versus progesteroneTwo trials (129 women) compared cerclage to prevention with vaginal progesterone in high risk women with short cervix on ultrasound; these trials were too small to detect reliable, clinically important differences for any review outcome. One included trial compared cerclage with intramuscular progesterone (75 women) which lacked power to detect group differences. History indicated cerclage versus ultrasound indicated cerclageEvidence from two trials (344 women) was too limited to establish differences for clinically important outcomes.Cervical cerclage reduces the risk of preterm birth in women at high-risk of preterm birth and probably reduces risk of perinatal deaths. There was no evidence of any differential effect of cerclage based on previous obstetric history or short cervix indications, but data were limited for all clinical groups. The question of whether cerclage is more or less effective than other preventative treatments, particularly vaginal progesterone, remains unanswered

Efficacy of ultrasound-indicated cerclage in twin pregnancies

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the perinatal outcomes in twin pregnancies with short cervical length (CL) with ultrasound-indicated cerclage (UIC) vs no cerclage (control). STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of asymptomatic twin pregnancies with transvaginal ultrasound (TVU) CL ≤25 mm at 16-24 weeks from 1995 through 2012 at 4 separate institutions. Exclusion criteria were: genetic or major fetal anomaly, multifetal reduction >14 weeks, monochorionic-monoamniotic placentation, or medically indicated preterm birth (PTB). Primary outcome was spontaneous PTB (SPTB) <34 weeks. Secondary outcome was SPTB <28, <32, and <37 weeks. We also planned to evaluate primary and secondary outcome for the subgroup of twin pregnancies with CL ≤15 mm. RESULTS: In all, 140 women with twin pregnancy and TVU-CL ≤25 mm were managed with either UIC (n = 57) or no cerclage (n = 83). Demographic characteristics were not significantly different except women who underwent UIC presented at an earlier gestational age (GA) at diagnosis of short CL. After adjusting for GA at presentation, there were no differences in GA at delivery or SPTB <28 weeks: 12 (21.2%) vs 20 (24.1%) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-1.37), <32 weeks: 22 (38.6%) vs 36 (43.4%) aOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.1-1.13), or <34 weeks: 29 (50.9%) vs 53 (63.9%) (aOR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-1.1). In the subgroup of women with CL ≤15 mm (32 with UIC and 39 controls) the interval between diagnosis to delivery was significantly prolonged by 12.5 ± 4.5 vs 8.8 ± 4.6 weeks (P < .001); SPTB <34 weeks was significantly decreased: 16 (50%) vs 31 (79.5%) (aOR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31-0.83) as was admission to neonatal intensive care unit: 38/58 (65.5%) vs 63/76 (82.9%) (aOR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24-0.81) when the UIC group was compared with the control group, respectively. CONCLUSION: UIC in asymptomatic twin pregnancies with TVU-CL ≤25 mm was not associated with significant effects on perinatal outcomes compared to controls. However, in the planned subgroup analysis of asymptomatic twin pregnancies with TVU-CL ≤15 mm before 24 weeks, UIC was associated with a significant prolongation of pregnancy by almost 4 more weeks, significantly decreased SPTB <34 weeks by 49%, and admission to neonatal intensive care unit by 58% compared with controls

Elective and emergency cervical cerclage and immediate pregnancy outcomes: a retrospective observational study

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Cervical cerclage: A review

AbstractCervical cerclage is a common prophylactic intervention that has been used in the management of second trimester loss for several decades, yet it remains one of the more controversial surgical interventions in obstetrics. The diagnosis of cervical insufficiency is notoriously difficult to make, and is usually a retrospective one based on a history of recurrent second trimester loss (or early preterm delivery) following painless cervical dilatation in the absence of contractions, bleeding, or other causes of recurrent pregnancy loss. This article reviews the current literature regarding the efficacy of transvaginal cerclage (in both an elective and emergency setting), therapeutic cerclage (whereby a suture is inserted on the basis of ultrasound evidence of cervical shortening) and transabdominal cerclage

Benefits of Shirodkar Stitch in Women with Failed McDonald Stitch

This is a case series presentation of 14 cases where Shirodkar stitch was inserted after failed McDonald stitch. The patients were either self referrals or from Obstetricians in Eastern Africa region. All the patients were able to carry the pregnancies to term and were delivered by Caesarean section. The findings show that Shirodkar stitch has a place in management of patients with recurrent pregnancy loss. There is need to familiarise obstetricians on the insertion of Shirodkar stitch

Pregnancy outcomes of patients with ultrasound-indicated and history-indicated mcdonald cervical cerclage

Objective: To assess pregnancy outcomes of patients with ultrasound-indicated and history-indicated McDonald cervical cerclage. Materials and methods: This was a cross-sectional study of pregnant women who had cervical cerclage performed at Aga Khan University Hospital, Karimabad campus. We obtained Institutional Review Board approval and reviewed the medical records of patients. A purposive continuous sampling technique was used. A total of 88 patients were included. There were no exclusion criteria. Outcome data were collected from the medical record of patients from January 2010 to December 2016. Results: Analysis reported a statistically significant lower gravidity and parity in the scan-indicated group as compared with other groups (p = 0.000 and p = 0.001, respectively). Previous history of cervical cerclage, history of mid-trimester miscarriage, and preterm labor were significantly associated with indication for cerclage (p = 0.001, 0.046, and 0.001, respectively). Cervical length was also significantly associated with the indication for cerclage (p p = 0.003 and p = 0.04 and 0.004, respectively). Conclusion: Our study showed that patients with a history suggestive of cervical incompetence or short cervix on ultrasound should be offered cerclage to prevent preterm birth and to improve neonatal outcomes. Ultrasound-indicated cerclage after the first trimester indicates that universal cervical-length screening by transvaginal ultrasound in the mid-trimester can pick silent cases, and inserting cerclage can prolong pregnancy to term. Clinical significance: Screening cervical length will help clinicians to reduce preterm birth rate, especially in resource-limited underdeveloped countries