DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20162635

Significance of cervical length and cervical gland area in cervical maturation

Channaveeregowda Savitha, Venkatesh Jnanashree Arpitha, Rangaiah Nagarathnamma

Abstract


Background: The traditional method of predicting whether an induced labor will result in successful vaginal delivery is based on pre-induction favorability of cervix as assessed by bishop score. Currently assessment of cervical maturation by sonographically at term in induction of labor is most accurate and highly reproducible compared to Bishop score. Shortening of cervix and non-detection of cervical gland area (CGA) could correspond to cervical maturation.

Methods: This study was carried out in a tertiary care teaching institute in Karnataka. 180 pregnant women at or beyond 37weeks who were planned for induction, Bishop score assessment of cervix and cervical assessment by ultrasound such as cervical length (CL) and cervical gland area was done one day prior to induction. Induction was with 0.5 mg PGE2gel. Maximum 3 inductions were carried out over a period of 24hrs. Primary outcome of the study was the onset of active labor.

Results: Amongst 160 pregnant women who were induced (20 women were excluded has they underwent LSCS for some other reasons during latent phase) cervical length by sonography < 2 cm were 14 none had failed induction. Cervical gland area < 2 mm (35) and absent (30) none had failed induction. Amongst the 180 pregnant women who were induced CGA was absent in 42 all had Bishop score > 4. Cervical length < 2 cm in 14 all had Bishop score > 4.

Conclusions: Sonographically detected cervical gland area and cervical length was evaluated in predicting response to induction. Absent CGA and CL < 2cm was associated with greater incidence of successful labor induction. This results show the CL and CGA has significant role in predicting outcome of labor.


Keywords


Cervical length, Cervical gland area, Bishop score

Full Text:

PDF

References


Leppert PC, Woessner JF. The collegenous tissues of the cervix during labor and delivery. The extracellular matrix of the uterus, cervix and the fetal membranes. Publisher: Ithaca, NY: perinatalogy Press; 1991:68-76.

Httfield AS. Sonographic cervical assessment to predict the success of induction of labor; a systematic review with media analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(2);186-92.

Jackson GM, Ludmir J, Bader TJ. The accuracy of digital examination and ultrasound in the evaluation of cervical lenght. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79:214-8.

Sekiya T, Ishihara K, Yoshimatsu K, Fukami T, Kikuchi S, Araki T, et al. Detection of cervical gland area during pregnancy by trans-vaginal sonography in the assessment of cervical maturation . Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1998;12(5):328-33.

Pires CR, Moron AF, Mattar R, Diniz AL, Andrade SG, Bussamra LC, et al. Cervical gland area as an ultrasonographic marker for preterm delivery. International J Obstet Gynecol. 2006:93(3):214-9.

Saanchez-Ramos L, Delke. Induction of labour and pregnancy termination for fetal anomaly. James DK, Steer PJ, Weiner CP, Gonik B. High risk pregnancy - management options, 3rd ed. London: W.B. Saunders; 2006;1392-495.

Arulkumaran S, Gibb DM, TambyRaja RL, Heng SH, Ratnam SS, et al. Failed induction of labour. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynecol. 1985;25:190-3.

Scheerer LJ. Ultrasound evaluation of the cervix. Callen Ultrasonography in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 4th edition. London W. B. Saunders; 2000:577-96.

Kushnir O, Vigil DA, Izquierdo L, Schiff M, Curet LB. Vaginal ultrasonograghic assessment of cervical length changes during normal pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;162:991-3.

Harrison RF. Assessment of factors constituting an inducibility profile. Obstet Gynecol. 1977;49:270-4.

Laecina AMG. Comparison of ultrasonographic cervical length and bishops score in predicting successful labor induction. Ata Obstetrician Gynecologician. 2007;86:799-804.

Pandis G, Papageorghiou AT, Ramanathan VG, Thompson MO, Nicolaides KH, et al. Pre induction sonographic measurement of cervical length in the prediction of successful induction of labour. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18:623-8.

Vonda ware. Trans-vaginal ultrasonographic cervical measurement as a predictor of successful labour induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:1030-2.

Watson WJ, Stevens D, Welter S, Day D. Factors predicting successful labour induction. Obstet Gynecol. 1996:88(6):990-2.

Oxorn H. Uterus and vagina. Human labour and birth and , 5th ed. New York: McGraw; 2000:17-22.

Cunningham FG, Leveno KG, Bloom SL. William's Obstetrics. 23rd ed. New York: McGraw Hill; 2010:136-73.

Hadi H. Cervical ripening and labour induction; Clinical guidelines. Clin Obstet and Gynecol. 2000;43:524-36.

Nambiar J. Induction of labour. Obstetrics and Gynecology for post graduates by SS Ratnam K Bhaskar Rao and Sabathan Arulkumaran, 3rd ed. Universities Press. 2004;1:364-72.

Roman H, Verspyck E, Vercoustre L, Degre S, Col JY, Firmin JM, et al. Does ultrasound examination when cervix is unfavourable improve the prediction of failed induction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;23:357-66.

Ware V, Raynor B. Transvaginal ultrasonographic cervical measurement as a predictor of successful induction of labour. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000:182;1030-2.

Chandra, Crane JM, Hutchens D, Young DC, et al. Transvaginal sonographic and digital examination in predicting successful labor induction. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98;2-6.

Tan PC, Vallikkannu N, Suguna S, Quek KF, Hassan J. Transvaginal sonographic measurement of cervical length vs Bishop score in labour induction at term :tolerability and prediction of cesarean delivery . Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007;86:799-804.

Asakura H, Fukami T, Kurashina R, Tateyama N, Doi D, Takeshita T. Significance of cervical gland area in predicting preterm delivery birth for patients with the threatened preterm delivery. Comparison CL and the fetal fibronectin. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2009;68:1-8.

Grgic O, Matijevic R, Vasilj O. Qualitative glandular cervical score as potential new sonomorphological parameters in screening for preterm delivery. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. 2006;32(3):333-8.

Yoshimatsu K, Sekiya T, Ishihara K, Fukami T, Otabe T, Araki T. Detection of the cervical gland area in threatened preterm labour using transvaginal sonography in the assessment of cervical maturation and pregnancy outcome. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2005;53:149-59.

Nishida N, Fukami T, Asakura H, Takeshita T. Significance of absent cervical gland area in prediction for preterm delivery: comparison of predictive efficacy with short cervix and positive fetal fibronectin. Ultrasound in Obstet and Gynecol. 2008;32:243-307.

Gopalan S, Jain V. Induction of labour. Mudaliar and Menon's clinical Obstetrics, 10th edition, Orient Longman; 2005:357-362.

Vrouenracte FP, Roumen FJ, Dehing CJ, van den Akker ES, Aarts MJ, Scheve EJ. Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labour in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;105:690-7.

Flatin Traub EF, Boulvain M, Faltin DL, Extermann P, Irion O. Reliability of Bishop score before labour induction at term. Eur J Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004;112:178-81.

Novakov Mikic, Ivanović L, Dukanac J. Transvaginal sonography of uterine cervix in prediction of the outcome labour induction. Med Pregl. 2000;53:569-78.