DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20194381

History-indicated transvaginal cerclage: results from a single-centre

Carolina C. Gomes, Diana C. Almeida, Elisabete Gonçalves, Ana P. Silva

Abstract


Background: Cervical incompetence occasionally results in mid-trimester pregnancy loss, preterm labour and increased foetal morbimortality. History-indicated cerclage is proposed when obstetric history suggests cervical incompetence. The aim of this study was to evaluate the maternal-foetal outcomes following prophylactic cervical cerclage.

Methods: Retrospective study reviewing data of all women undergoing transvaginal history-indicated cerclage from January 1st, 2008 to December 31th, 2017 at Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Algarve - Faro. Primary outcome: gestational age <37weeks at birth. Secondary outcomes: neonatal morbimortality and intensive care unit (NICU) admission and maternal morbidity. Data were analyzed with IBM SPSS Statistics 23.

Results: A total of 12 history-indicated cerclages were performed (9 women). At first cerclage, mean maternal age, gestity, parity and live children were 27.6, 2.44, 1.11 and 0.78 (87.7% preterm), respectively. At cerclage placement, mean gestational age and cervical length were 16.1 weeks and 27.5mm. Average hospital admission was 10.7 days. In all cases McDonald technique was performed. Four hospital readmissions occurred for threatened labour. Mean gestational age at cerclage removal was 36.9 weeks (83.3% in ambulatory) and 38.9 at delivery. Average time between cerclage removal and labour was 14.5 days. Spontaneous onset of labour occurred in 75% and vaginal delivery in 83.4%. There were no reports of preterm birth, foetal admission to NICU or maternal complications. Mean number of live children after procedure was 1.58.

Conclusions: Prophylactic cervical cerclage seems to improve pregnancy outcome with minimal maternal risks. However, our data suggest over inclusion of women, with unnecessary procedures, emphasizing the importance of re-evaluating inclusion criteria.


Keywords


Cervical cerclage, Cervical stitch, Cervical insufficiency, Cervico-isthmic incompetence, Preterm birth, Pregnancy loss

Full Text:

PDF

References


Roman A, Suahg A, Berghella V. Overview of cervical insufficiency: diagnosis, etiologies and risk factors. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;59(2):237-40.

Shennan A, Jones B. The cervix and prematurity: aetiology, predictions and prevention. Seminars Fetal Neonatal Med. 2004;9:471e479.

Vinka J, Feltovich H. Cervical etiology of spontaneous preterm birth. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;21(2):106-12.

Sperling JD, Dahlke JD, Gonzalez GM. Cerclage use: a review of 3 national guidelines. Obstet Gynecol Sur. 2017;72(4):235-41.

Roman A, Suahg A, Berghella V. Cerclage: indications and patient counseling. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;59(2):264-9.

Okusanya BO, Isabu PA. Outcome of pregnancy with history-indicated cervical cerclage insertion in a low resource setting. J Matern Fetal neonatal Med. 2015;28(3):284-7.

Ikimalo JI, Izuchukwu KE, Inimgba N. Pregnancy outcome after cerclage for cervical incompetence at the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt. Afr J Reprod Health. 2012;16(3):180-4.

Korb D. Effectiveness of elective cervical cerclage according to obstetric history. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2017;46(1):53-9.

Chan LL. Indications for and pregnancy outcomes of cervical cerclage: 11-year comparison of patients undergoing history-indicated, ultrasound-indicated or rescue cerclage. Hong Kong Med J. 2015;21(4):310-7.

Jarde A, Lutsiv O, Bevene J, McDonald SD. Vaginal progesterone, oral progesterone, 17-OHPC, cerclage and pessary for preventing preterm birth in at risk singleton pregnancies: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis. BJOG. 2018.

Medley N, Vogel JP, Care A, Alfirevic Z. Interventions during pregnancy to prevent preterm birth: an overview if Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;11:CD012505.