Prediction of outcomes for rescue cerclage in cervical insufficiency: A multicenter retrospective study.

Purpose: Cervical insufficiency is a significant risk factor for preterm birth and miscarriage during the second trimester; cervical cerclage is a treatment option. This study seeks to evaluate the predictive roles of various clinical factors and to develop predictive models for immediate and long-term outcomes after rescue cerclage. Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study on patients who underwent rescue cerclage at 14 to 26 weeks of gestation. Data were collected from the Electronic Medical Record systems of participating hospitals. Outcomes were dichotomized into immediate failure (inability to maintain pregnancy for at least 48 hours post-cerclage, gestational latency < 2 days) and long-term success (maintenance of pregnancy until at least 28 weeks of gestation). Clinical factors influencing these outcomes were analyzed. Results: The study included 98 patients. Immediate failure correlated with longer prolapsed membrane lengths, elevated C-reactive protein levels at admission, and extended operation time. The successful maintenance of pregnancy until at least 28 weeks was associated with earlier gestational age at diagnosis, negative AmniSure test results, longer lengths of the functional cervix, and smaller cervical dilatation at the time of cerclage. Binary logistic regression models for immediate failure and long-term success exhibited excellent and good predictive abilities, respectively (AUROC = 0.912, 95% CI: 0.834-0.989; and AUROC = 0.872, 95% CI: 0.788-0.956). Conclusion: The developed logistic regression models offer a valuable tool for the prognostic assessment of patients undergoing rescue cerclage, enabling informed clinical decision-making.

Emergency cervical cerclage in delayed-interval delivery of twin pregnancies: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The protocol for delayed-interval delivery of the second twin in twin pregnancies has not been standardized. Cervical cerclage is often performed, but its use is debated. To conduct a scoping review on cervical cerclage for prolonging the intertwin delivery interval and improving second twin survival and maternal outcomes after preterm delivery or spontaneous abortion of the first twin in twin pregnancies. METHODS: Seven Chinese and English language databases were searched from inception to March 1, 2023, including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP Chinese Science Journal Database, and Sinomed. Relevant observational studies that assessed the effectiveness of the use of cervical cerclage in delayed-interval delivery of twins were screened and selected, and raw data were extracted, and descriptive statistics and chi-square analysis were performed. RESULTS: A total of 102 articles were retrieved. After screening and exclusion of duplicate and irrelevant articles, 22 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were obtained. Studies in which cerclage was performed reported longer intertwin delivery intervals than those that did not perform cerclage, and the difference was statistically significant. The cerclage group also tended to have lower rates of chorioamnionitis and maternal complications, but the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: After excluding patients with contraindications, emergency cervical cerclage can be considered in cases of spontaneous abortion of the first twin in twin pregnancies to prolong the gestation and improve the prognosis of the remaining fetus until it becomes viable and increases its birth weight.

Development and validation of models for predicting preterm birth and gestational latency following emergency cervical cerclage: A multicenter cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency cervical cerclage is a recognized method for preventing mid-trimester pregnancy loss and premature birth; however, its benefits remain controversial. This study aimed to establish preoperative models predicting preterm birth and gestational latency following emergency cervical cerclage in singleton pregnant patients with a high risk of preterm birth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients who received emergency cerclage between 2015 and 2023 in three institutions. Patients were grouped into a derivation cohort (n = 141) and an independent validation cohort (n = 61). Univariate and multivariate logistic and Cox regression analyses were used to identify independent predictive variables and establish the models. Harrell's C-index, time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves and areas under the curves, calibration curve, and decision curve analyses were performed to assess the models. RESULTS: The models incorporated gestational weeks at cerclage placement, history of prior second-trimester loss and/or preterm birth, cervical dilation, and preoperative C-reactive protein level. The C-index of the model for predicting preterm birth before 28 weeks was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82-0.93) in the derivation cohort and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.71-0.92) in the independent validation cohort; The C-index of the model for predicting gestational latency was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.66-0.75) and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71-0.84), respectively. In the derivation set, the areas under the curves were 0.84, 0.81, and 0.84 for predicting 1-, 3- and 5-week pregnancy prolongation, respectively. The corresponding values for the external validation were 0.78, 0.78, and 0.79, respectively. Calibration curves showed a good homogeneity between the observed and predicted ongoing pregnant probabilities. Decision curve analyses revealed satisfactory clinical usefulness. CONCLUSIONS: These novel models provide reliable and valuable prognostic predictions for patients undergoing emergency cerclage. The models can assist clinicians and patients in making personalized clinical decisions before opting for the cervical cerclage.

Pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women taking oral probiotic undergoing cerclage compared to placebo: two blinded randomized controlled trial.

AIM: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the oral probiotic effect on pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women undergoing cerclage compared to placebo. METHODS: This study was a double-blind randomized clinical trial undertaken in Yasuj, Iran. 114 eligible participants who have undergone cerclage were randomly divided to either receive probiotic adjuvant or 17α-OHP (250 mg, IM) with placebo from the 16th -37th week of pregnancy by "block" randomization method. Our primary outcomes were preterm labor (PTB) (late and early) and secondary outcomes were other obstetrical and neonatal outcomes included preterm pre-labor rupture of membranes (PPROM), pre-labor rupture of membranes (PROM), mode of delivery, and neonatal outcomes including anthropometric characterize and Apgar score (one and fifth-minute). RESULTS: Results show that there are no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of PTB in < 34th (15.51% vs. 17.86%; P = 0.73) and 34-37th weeks of pregnancy (8.7% vs. 16.1%; P = 0.22), and mode of delivery (P = 0.09). PPROM (8.7% vs. 28.5%; P = 0.006) PROM (10.3% vs. 25%; P = 0.04) was significantly lower in patients receiving probiotic adjuvant compared to the control group. After delivery, the findings of the present study showed that there were no significant differences in newborn's weight (3082.46 ± 521.8vs. 2983.89 ± 623.89), head circumstance (36.86 ± 1.53vs. 36.574 ± 1.52), height (45.4 ± 5.34 vs. 47.33 ± 4.92) and Apgar score in one (0.89 ± 0.03 vs. 0.88 ± 0.05) and five minutes (0.99 ± 0.03vs. 0.99 ± 0.03) after birth. CONCLUSION: Our result has shown that the consumption of Lactofem probiotic from the 16th week until 37th of pregnancy can lead to a reduction of complications such as PPROM and PROM.

Urogenital cultures and preterm birth in women with cervical cerclage: a single center retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The leading hypothesis of the pathogenesis of cervical insufficiency suggests a role of cervical inflammation. Urogenital tract infections could play a causative role in this process. To test this hypothesis in women with a cervical cerclage, we aimed to retrospectively examine the relationship between gestational age (GA) at delivery and positive urogenital cultures. METHODS: This single center retrospective study reviewed the records of all women with a singleton pregnancy that underwent cervical cerclage (n = 203) between 2010 and 2020 at the University Hospital of Leuven, Belgium. Transvaginal cerclages were categorized as history indicated (TVC I, n = 94), ultrasound indicated (TVC II, n = 79) and clinically indicated (TVC III, n = 20). Additionally, ten women received transabdominal cerclage (TAC). Urogenital cultures (vaginal and urine) were taken before and after cerclage with 4-week intervals. Urogenital cultures were reported 'positive' if urine and/or vaginal cultures showed significant growth of a microorganism. Treatment decision depended on culture growth and clinical presentation. The primary aim was to evaluate the association between the urogenital culture results and the GA at delivery, for each of the cerclage groups. Secondarily, to investigate the effect of antibiotic treatment of positive cultures on GA at delivery. RESULTS: Positive pre-cerclage urogenital cultures were associated with lower GA at delivery in TVC III (positive culture 26w4d ± 40d vs. negative 29w6d ± 54d, p = 0.036). For TVC I, GA at delivery was longer when pre-cerclage urogenital cultures were positive (positive culture 38w0d ± 26d vs. negative 35w4d ± 42d, p = 0.035). Overall post-cerclage urogenital cultures status was not associated with a different GA at delivery. Treating patients with pre- or post-cerclage positive urogenital cultures did also not change GA at delivery. CONCLUSION: Positive urogenital cultures taken before clinically indicated cerclage intervention may be associated with lower GA at delivery. However, there seems to be no benefit of antibiotic treatment or routine urogenital cultures during follow-up of asymptomatic women after cerclage placement.

A Retrospective Study Comparing Laparoscopic Transabdominal Cerclage: Pre-Pregnancy Versus in Pregnancy With Their Reproductive Outcomes and Safety.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of laparoscopic transabdominal cerclage (TAC) pre-pregnancy and laparoscopic TAC in pregnancy in treating cervical insufficiency. METHOD: A retrospective analytical study comparing outcomes of laparoscopic TAC pre-pregnancy with laparoscopic TAC in pregnancy. A total of 178 patients who underwent laparoscopic TAC at our hospital were enrolled in the study. In total, 122 patients underwent interval cerclage, and 56 patients underwent cerclage during pregnancy. RESULTS: A total of 178 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. Second-trimester abortions decreased by 50%, with an overall increase in full-term live births (32.53%) in patients undergoing laparoscopic TAC pre-pregnancy. The fetal survival rate was around 90% and 85% with laparoscopic TAC pre-pregnancy and laparoscopic TAC in pregnancy, respectively. Although the obstetric outcomes of laparoscopic TAC pre-pregnancy and in pregnancy were comparable, laparoscopic TAC pre-pregnancy was safer than laparoscopic TAC in pregnancy due to the complications associated with the procedure during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic TAC pre-pregnancy yielded better reproductive outcomes than laparoscopic TAC in pregnancy and was associated with fewer perioperative complications.

Risk factors for high-stage histological chorioamnionitis among pregnancies with cervical incompetence.

AIM: The study aimed to identify predictive risk factor to identify high-stage histological chorioamnionitis (HCA) in pregnancies with cervical incompetence (CIC). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted by including 116 pregnant women with cervical incompetence that required prophylactical and therapeutical cerclage. The histopathology examination on placenta was conducted with informed patient consent. All the cases included in this study were divided based on the severity degree of HCA. The demographic characteristic and the parameters related to maternal and fetal outcome were all analyzed. Besides, perioperative parameters of cerclage, including cervical length, cervical morphology, and laboratory indexes were also compared between two groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to determine the risk factor of severe chorioamnionitis. RESULTS: Severe HCA was significantly associated with cervical morphology, cerclage indication, cerclage type, and cervical length measured via ultrasound and vaginal examination. After adjusted for confounders, V-type funneling and short cervix was indicated as independent risk factors of severe HCA by multivariate logistic regression analysis, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: V-type funneling and short cervix may indicate the elevated risk of high-stage HCA. Due to the negative outcomes related with high-stage HCA, appropriate prenatal treatment would improve the pregnancy outcomes in cerclaged population. To facilitate postpartum treatment, placental histological examination should be routinely recommended to identify the high-stage HCA, especially in high risk pregnancies.

Outcomes of Ultrasound or Physical Examination-Indicated Cerclage according to the Degree of Cervical Dilation.

OBJECTIVE: Pregnancy outcomes of individuals receiving cervical cerclage when the cervix is dilated are not well known. We sought to examine preterm birth rates after ultrasound or physical examination-indicated cerclage placement according to the degree of cervical dilation. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of individuals with singleton pregnancies undergoing ultrasound or physical examination-indicated cerclage before 240/7 weeks of gestation from 2004 to 2018. Individuals were categorized based on the degree of cervical dilation at the time of cerclage. Our primary outcome was preterm delivery at less than 37 weeks of gestation. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95th confidence intervals (95% CI), controlling for predefined covariates. RESULTS: Of 147 individuals undergoing ultrasound or physical examination-indicated cerclage, 90/147 (61%) had a closed or 0.5 cm dilated cervix at the time of cerclage placement, 45/147 (31%) had a cervical dilation of 1 to 2.5 cm, and 12/147 (8%) had a cervical dilation of 3 to 4 cm at the time of placement. Individuals with a cervical dilation of 1 to 2.5 cm compared with those who had a closed cervix did not have increased odds of preterm delivery (58 vs. 42%; aOR: 1.95; 95% CI: 0.93-4.07). However, individuals with a cervical dilation of 3 to 4 cm compared with individuals who had a closed cervix had significantly increased odds of preterm delivery (75 vs. 42%; aOR: 4.33; 95% CI: 1.05-17.77). CONCLUSION: The rate of preterm birth increases with increasing cervical dilation at the time of cerclage placement. However, individuals who have a cerclage placed when the cervix is 1 to 2.5 cm can achieve an outcome that is not significantly different from those who had a cerclage placed when the cervix is closed. KEY POINTS: · Time from cerclage placement to delivery decreases as cervical dilation increases.. · Individuals 1 to 2.5 cm dilated at the time of cerclage can achieve a favorable outcome.. · A cervical dilation of ≥3 cm at cerclage placement was associated with extreme prematurity..

Effect of different surgical routes on pregnancy outcome of history-indicated cervical cerclage.

OBJECTIVE: To study the guiding significance of medical history on laparoscopic and vaginal cervical cerclage in the treatment of cervical incompetence and its influence on pregnancy outcome. METHODS: A total of 53 cases by laparoscopic abdominal cervical cerclage (LAC group) before pregnancy and 73 cases by transvaginal cervix cerclage (TVC group) at 12-14 weeks of pregnancy were collected. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed on the influencing factors of delivery gestational weeks. Furthermore, the gestational weeks after cervical cerclage were compared between the two groups with high- and low-risk grades. RESULTS: The number of previous uterine cavity operations in LAC group was more than that TVC group, and the costs of operation were more than TVC group. At the same time, the hospitalization days and operation time were longer than those in TVC group, and the delivery rate of cesarean section was higher than TVC group, but the total hospitalization times were less than TVC group (P < 0.05). The rate of delivery before 34 weeks of pregnancy and the incidence of premature rupture of membranes or premature labor in LAC group were lower than those in TVC group (P < 0.05). In TVC group, the increased number of prior PTB or STL and the history of cervical cerclage failure would increase the risk of premature delivery before 34 weeks of pregnancy. There was no increased risk of preterm delivery before 34 weeks of pregnancy in LAC group (P > 0.05). According to the risk level, in the high-risk group, the delivery rate of LAC group at gestational weeks < 37 weeks, < 34 weeks and < 28 weeks was lower than that of TVC group. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic cervical cerclage might be more effective in preventing premature delivery before 34 weeks of gestation, and its influence on delivery gestational weeks was not affected by related medical history. For high-risk patients with the history of prior PTB or STL and failed cerclage, laparoscopic cervical cerclage might be more effective than vaginal cervical cerclage in preventing extremely preterm before 28 weeks, premature delivery before 34 weeks and premature delivery before 37 weeks. Therefore, our limited experience suggested that LAC can be a recommended option for patients with high-risk history.

Analysis of perinatal outcomes for emergency cervical cerclage in singleton pregnancies at 24-28 weeks of gestation.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cerclage is the only effective treatment for cervical insufficiency, effectively preventing late miscarriage and preterm birth. The effectiveness and safety of emergency cervical cerclage (ECC) as an emergency treatment when the cervix is already dilated or when there is protrusion of the fetal membranes into the vagina remain controversial, especially in pregnancies at 24-28 weeks when the fetus is viable. There is still no consensus on whether emergency cervical cerclage should be performed in such cases. PURPOSE: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of emergency cervical cerclage in singleton pregnant women at 24-28 weeks of gestation. METHODS: This study employed a single-center prospective cohort design, enrolling singleton pregnant women at 24-28 weeks of gestation with ultrasound or physical examination indicating cervical dilation or even membrane protrusion. Emergency cervical cerclage was compared with conservative treatment. The primary endpoints included a comprehensive assessment of perinatal pregnancy loss, significant neonatal morbidity, and adverse neonatal outcomes. Secondary endpoints included prolonged gestational age, preterm birth, neonatal hospitalization rate, premature rupture of membranes, and intrauterine infection/chorioamnionitis. RESULTS: From June 2021 to March 2023, a total of 133 pregnant women participated in this study, with 125 completing the trial, and were allocated to either the Emergency Cervical Cerclage (ECC) group (72 cases) or the conservative treatment group (53 cases) based on informed consent from the pregnant women. The rate of adverse neonatal outcomes was 8.33% in the ECC group and 26.42% in the conservative treatment (CT) group, with a statistically significant difference (P = 0.06). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of perinatal pregnancy loss and significant neonatal morbidity. The conservative treatment group had a mean prolonged gestational age of 63.0 (23.0, 79.5) days, while the ECC group had 84.0 (72.5, 89.0) days, with a statistically significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.001). Compared with CT group, the ECC group showed a significantly reduced incidence of preterm birth before 28 weeks, 32 weeks, and 34 weeks, with statistical significance (P = 0.046, 0.007, 0.001), as well as a significantly decreased neonatal hospitalization rate (P = 0.013, 0.031). Additionally, ECC treatment did not increase the risk of preterm premature rupture of membranes or intrauterine infection/chorioamnionitis, with no statistically significant differences (P = 0.406, 0.397). CONCLUSION: In singleton pregnant women with cervical insufficiency at 24-28 weeks of gestation, emergency cervical cerclage can reduce adverse neonatal pregnancy outcomes, effectively prolong gestational age, decrease preterm births before 28 weeks, 32 weeks, and 34 weeks, lower neonatal hospitalization rates, and does not increase the risk of preterm premature rupture of membranes or intrauterine infection/chorioamnionitis.

Use and Impact of Pessary, Cerclage, and Progesterone for the Secondary Prevention of Preterm Birth: Data from the German Neonatal Network.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the use and effect of cervical stitch cerclage, pessary, and progesterone on pregnancy outcome in mothers of very low birth weight infants (VLBWI) born<32 weeks of gestation in the German Neonatal Network (GNN). METHODS: The GNN is a population-based cohort study enrolling VLBWI since 2009. We included 575 neonates from 424 mothers into our analysis, who were born between 2015 and 2019, after prenatal intervention with cerclage, pessary, progesterone or a combination between 20/0 to 25/0 weeks of gestation to prevent preterm birth. Median intervention-to-birth interval was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: 231 of 424 pregnant women had a cerclage only (54.5%), 76 women a pessary only (17.9%), and 27 were prescribed progesterone only (15.3%). The most common combination treatment (>1 intervention group) was cerclage plus progesterone (n=27), followed by cerclage plus pessary (n=13). The median intervention-to-birth interval for the whole cohort was 24 days (IQR 19.0 days). The earlier the intervention was started, the longer the intervention-to-birth interval lasted: When started at 20 weeks, the interval was 34 days in contrast to 11.5 days, when started at 25 weeks. The >1 group was born at a significantly higher median GA with 27.0 weeks (IQR 2.9 weeks) and a higher median birth weight of 980 g (IQR 394 g) accordingly. CONCLUSION: We propose that the earliest possible start of intervention leads to the most efficient pregnancy prolongation.

Cervical cerclage for prevention of preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcome in twin pregnancies with short cervical length or cervical dilatation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal approach to prevent preterm birth (PTB) in twins has not been fully established yet. Recent evidence suggests that placement of cervical cerclage in twin pregnancies with short cervical length at ultrasound or cervical dilatation at physical examination might be associated with a reduced risk of PTB. However, such evidence is based mainly on small studies thus questioning the robustness of these findings. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the role of cervical cerclage in preventing PTB and adverse maternal or perinatal outcomes in twin pregnancies. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Key databases searched and date of last search: MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL were searched electronically on 20 April 2023. Eligibility criteria: Inclusion criteria were observational studies assessing the risk of PTB among twin pregnancies undergoing cerclage versus no cerclage and randomized trials in which twin pregnancies were allocated to cerclage for the prevention of PTB or to a control group (e.g., placebo or treatment as usual). The primary outcome was PTB <34 weeks of gestation. The secondary outcomes were PTB <37, 32, 28, 24 weeks of gestation, gestational age at birth, the interval between diagnosis and birth, preterm prelabor rupture of the membranes (pPROM), chorioamnionitis, perinatal loss, and perinatal morbidity. Subgroup analyses according to the indication for cerclage (short cervical length or cervical dilatation) were also performed. Risk of bias assessment: The risk of bias of the included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, while that of the observational studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Statistical analysis: Summary risk ratios (RRs) of the likelihood of detecting each categorical outcome in exposed versus unexposed women, and (b) summary mean differences (MDs) between exposed and unexposed women (for each continuous outcome), with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using head-to-head meta-analyses. Synthesis of the results: Eighteen studies (1,465 twin pregnancies) were included. Placement of cervical cerclage in women with a twin pregnancy with a short cervix at ultrasound or cervical dilatation at physical examination was associated with a reduced risk of PTB <34 weeks of gestation (RR: 0.73, 95% CI [0.59, 0.91], p = 0.005 corresponding to a 16% difference in the absolute risk, AR), <32 (RR: 0.69, 95% CI [0.57, 0.84], p < 0.001; AR: 16.92%), <28 (RR: 0.54, 95% [CI 0.43, 0.67], 0.001; AR: 18.29%), and <24 (RR: 0.48, 95% CI [0.23, 0.97], p = 0.04; AR: 15.57%) weeks of gestation and a prolonged gestational age at birth (MD: 2.32 weeks, 95% [CI 0.99, 3.66], p < 0.001). Cerclage in twin pregnancy with short cervical length or cervical dilatation was also associated with a reduced risk of perinatal loss (RR: 0.38, 95% CI [0.25, 0.60], p < 0.001; AR: 19.62%) and composite adverse outcome (RR: 0.69, 95% CI [0.53, 0.90], p = 0.007; AR: 11.75%). Cervical cerclage was associated with a reduced risk of PTB <34 weeks both in women with cervical length <15 mm (RR: 0.74, 95% CI [0.58, 0.95], p = 0.02; AR: 29.17%) and in those with cervical dilatation (RR: 0.68, 95% CI [0.57, 0.80], p < 0.001; AR: 35.02%). The association between cerclage and prevention of PTB and adverse perinatal outcomes was exclusively due to the inclusion of observational studies. The quality of retrieved evidence at GRADE assessment was low. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency cerclage for cervical dilation or short cervical length <15 mm may be potentially associated with a reduction in PTB and improved perinatal outcomes. However, these findings are mainly based upon observational studies and require confirmation in large and adequately powered RCTs.

Monofilament suture versus braided suture thread to improve pregnancy outcomes after vaginal cervical cerclage (C-STICH): a pragmatic randomised, controlled, phase 3, superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Miscarriage in the second trimester and preterm birth are significant global problems. Vaginal cervical cerclage is performed to prevent pregnancy loss and preterm birth. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of a monofilament suture thread compared with braided suture thread on pregnancy loss rates in women undergoing a cervical cerclage. METHODS: C-STICH was a pragmatic, randomised, controlled, superiority trial done at 75 obstetric units in the UK. Women with a singleton pregnancy who received a vaginal cervical cerclage due to a history of pregnancy loss or premature birth, or if indicated by ultrasound, were centrally randomised (1:1) using minimisation to receive a monofilament suture or braided suture thread for their cervical cerclage. Women and outcome assessors were masked to allocation as far as possible. The primary outcome was pregnancy loss, defined as miscarriage, stillbirth, or neonatal death in the first week of life, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all women who were randomly assigned). Safety was also assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN15373349. FINDINGS: Between Aug 21, 2015, and Jan 28, 2021, 2049 women were randomly assigned to receive a monofilament suture (n=1025) or braided suture (n=1024). The primary outcome was ascertained in 1003 women in the monofilament suture group and 993 women in the braided suture group. Pregnancy loss occurred in 80 (8·0%) of 1003 women in the monofilament suture group and 75 (7·6%) of 993 women in the braided suture group (adjusted risk ratio 1·05 [95% CI 0·79 to 1·40]; adjusted risk difference 0·002 [95% CI -0·02 to 0·03]). INTERPRETATION: Monofilament suture did not reduce rate of pregnancy loss when compared with a braided suture. Clinicians should use the results of this trial to facilitate discussions around the choice of suture thread to optimise outcomes. FUNDING: National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Twenty years of experience with less radical fertility-sparing surgery in early-stage cervical cancer: Pregnancy outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The standard procedure in cervical cancer is radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy (PLND). Because of the increasing age of women bearing children, fertility has become a major challenge. We present pregnancy results after less radical fertility-sparing surgery in women with IA1, LVSI positive, IA2 and IB1 (<2 cm, infiltration less than half of the cervical stroma). MATERIALS AND METHOD: All women (n = 91) underwent laparoscopic sentinel lymph node mapping with frozen section followed by PLND and "selective parametrectomy" (removal of afferent lymphatic channels from the paracervix) if sentinel nodes (SLN) are negative. If lymph nodes were verified negative by definitive histopathology, patients were treated by simple trachelectomy (IB1) or large cone (IA1/IA2) biopsy 1 week after primary surgery. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2018, 91 women were enrolled in the study (median age 29.1 years, range 21-40). Fertility was spared in 76 (83.5%) women; 13 (17.1%) women did not plan future pregnancy and 63 (82.9%) had pregnancy desires. Fifty-four of 63 women conceived (pregnancy rate 85.7%) and 48 of 63 delivered 58 babies (delivery rate 76.2%). Thirty-nine women delivered in term (67.2%): 13 women between 32 and 36 + 6 weeks of pregnancy, 3 between 28 and 31 + 6 weeks and 3 between 24 and 27 + 6 weeks. Only one woman still plans pregnancy. One woman is currently pregnant. CONCLUSION: The goal of fertility-sparing surgery is to produce good oncological results and promising pregnancy outcomes. Pregnancy results after less radical fertility-sparing procedures show promise (pregnancy rate 82.9% and delivery rate 76.2%).

Perioperative complications of a transvaginal cervical cerclage in singleton pregnancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Given that many studies report on a limited spectrum of adverse events of transvaginal cervical cerclage for preventing preterm birth, but are not powered to draw conclusions about its safety, the objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review with pooled risk analyses of perioperative complications and compare characteristics on the basis of indication for cerclage in singleton pregnancies. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the prospective trial registers ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched from inception to April 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials and both retrospective and prospective observational cohort studies reporting about complications in history-indicated cerclage, ultrasound-indicated cerclage, or physical examination-indicated cerclage were eligible. Studies were included if they contained original data on the occurrence of adverse events during surgery or within 24 hours after surgery. METHODS: The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort and case-control studies were used for the critical appraisal. The pooled risk assessment was conducted using meta and metafor packages in R (studio), version 4.0.3. RESULTS: The search yielded 2328 potential studies; 3 randomized controlled trials, 3 prospective, and 38 retrospective cohort studies were included in the final analysis. Of the 4511 women with singleton gestations, 1561 (34.6%) underwent history-indicated cerclage, 1348 (29.9%) underwent ultrasound-indicated cerclage, and 1549 (33.3%) underwent physical examination-indicated cerclage. Most perioperative complications occurred in physical examination-indicated cerclage, especially hemorrhage (2.3%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-7.6) and preterm premature rupture of membranes (2.5%; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-4.5). The fewest complications occurred in history-indicated cerclage, varying from 0.0% of preterm premature rupture of membranes (95% confidence interval, 0.0-1.7) to 0.9% of hemorrhage (95% confidence interval, 0.0-7.9). In ultrasound-indicated cerclage, the most common complication was hemorrhage (1.4%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-4.1), followed by lacerations (0.6%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-3.1) and preterm premature rupture of membranes (0.3%; 95% confidence interval, 0.0-0.8). CONCLUSION: The highest risk of perioperative complications was observed in physical examination-indicated cerclage in comparison with ultrasound- and history-indicated cerclage. However, the occurrence of complications is poorly documented in the published literature, as is the timing of the complications (ie, perioperative or later in pregnancy). There is an urgent need for uniform complication reporting policy in both cohort studies and randomized controlled trials on cerclage.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #65: Transabdominal cerclage.

Cerclage is the mainstay of treatment for cervical insufficiency. Although transabdominal cerclage may have advantages over transvaginal cerclage, it is associated with increased morbidity and the need for cesarean delivery. In this Consult, we review the current literature on the benefits and risks of transabdominal cerclage and provide recommendations based on the available evidence. The following are Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine recommendations: (1) we recommend that transabdominal cerclage placement be offered to patients with a previous transvaginal cerclage placement (history or ultrasound indicated) and subsequent spontaneous singleton delivery before 28 weeks of gestation (GRADE 1B); (2) we recommend maternal-fetal medicine consultation for counseling patients who may be candidates for transabdominal cerclage and those who have undergone transabdominal cerclage (Best Practice); (3) we suggest that both laparoscopic transabdominal cerclage and open transabdominal cerclage are acceptable and the decision of approach may depend on gestational age, technical feasibility, available resources, and expertise (GRADE 2B); (4) we suggest that transabdominal cerclage can be performed before pregnancy or in the first trimester of pregnancy with similar fetal outcomes. If a patient with an indication for transabdominal cerclage presents after the first trimester of pregnancy, transabdominal cerclage can still be considered before 22 weeks of gestation (GRADE 2C); (5) we recommend that routine transvaginal cervical length screening not be performed for patients with a transabdominal cerclage in situ (GRADE 1C); (6) we suggest that for individuals at risk of recurrent spontaneous preterm birth, including those with a transabdominal cerclage in situ, a risk-benefit discussion of supplemental vaginal progesterone be undertaken with shared decision-making (GRADE 2C); (7) we suggest that pregnancy loss be managed with dilation and curettage or dilation and evacuation with a transabdominal cerclage in situ or via usual obstetrical management after laparoscopic removal of the transabdominal cerclage, depending on gestational age and resources available (GRADE 2C); and (8) we suggest cesarean delivery between 37 0/7 and 39 0/7 weeks of gestation for patients with a transabdominal cerclage in situ (GRADE 2C).

Cost-effectiveness of history-indicated cerclage vs cervical length assessment for prevention of preterm birth.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is one of the major causes of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Preterm delivery is a large burden to our health care system, and a history of preterm birth is one of the most common risk factors for subsequent preterm birth. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the cost-effectiveness of the history-indicated cerclage strategy compared with the transvaginal ultrasound cervical length assessment strategy in individuals with a history of preterm birth. STUDY DESIGN: We developed a decision analysis model to compare history-indicated cerclage and cervical length assessment. The primary outcome was the net monetary benefit from a maternal and neonatal perspective of both strategies, defined as the value of an intervention with a known willingness to pay threshold for a unit of benefit. The time horizon was set to be a lifetime. Costs (in 2022 USD) included those for the cerclage, serial transvaginal ultrasounds, maternal care for admission, neonatal care, and severe disability. Probabilities, utilities, and costs were derived from the literature. A cost-effectiveness threshold was set at $100,000 per QALY (quality-adjusted life year). We first conducted 1-way sensitivity analyses with associated variables as sensitivity analyses. We then performed a probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation with 1000 trials to test the robustness of the results in the setting of simultaneous changes in probabilities, costs, and utilities. RESULTS: In our base-case analysis, the history-indicated cerclage strategy compared to transvaginal ultrasound cervical length assessment was associated with more cost ($85,038 vs $70,155), with slightly less effectiveness from the maternal perspective (26.74 QALY vs 26.78 QALY) and from the neonatal perspective (28.91 QALY vs 29.06 QALY), and with less maternal and neonatal net monetary benefit. Therefore, the history-indicated cerclage strategy was dominated. With the 1000 trials of Monte Carlo simulation, transvaginal ultrasound cervical length assessment was the preferred strategy 84% and 88% of the time from the maternal and neonatal perspectives, respectively. CONCLUSION: The history-indicated cerclage strategy was more expensive and slightly less effective than the transvaginal ultrasound cervical length assessment strategy with a lower net monetary benefit.

McDonald versus Shirodkar cerclage technique in the prevention of preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cerclage has been used for decades to reduce preterm birth. The Shirodkar and McDonald cerclage are the most commonly used techniques with no current consensus on the preferred technique. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of the Shirodkar and McDonald cerclage techniques in preventing preterm birth. SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies were sourced from six electronic databases and reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies including women with a singleton pregnancy, requiring a cervical cerclage, using either the Shirodkar or McDonald technique that ran comparative analyses between the two techniques. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was preterm birth before 37 weeks, with analyses at 28, 32, 34 and 35 weeks. Secondary data were also collected on neonatal, maternal and obstetric outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Seventeen papers were included: 16 were retrospective cohort studies and one was a randomised controlled trial. The Shirodkar technique was significantly less likely to result in preterm birth before 37 weeks than the McDonald technique (relative risk [RR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.98). This finding was supported by a statistically significant reduction in rates of preterm birth before 35, 34 and 32 weeks, PPROM, difference in cervical length, cerclage to delivery interval, and an increase in birthweight in the Shirodkar group. No difference was seen in preterm birth rates <28 weeks, neonatal mortality, chorioamnionitis, cervical laceration or caesarean section rates. The RR for preterm birth prior to 37 weeks was no longer significant when sensitivity analyses were performed removing studies with a serious risk of bias. However, similar analyses removing studies that utilised adjunctive progesterone strengthened the primary outcome (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.93). CONCLUSION: Shirodkar cerclage reduces the rate of preterm birth prior to 35, 34 and 32 weeks' gestation when compared with McDonald cerclage; however, the overall quality of the studies in this review is low. Further, large, well-designed randomised controlled trials are required to address this important question to optimise care for women who may benefit from cervical cerclage.

Predicting spontaneous preterm birth in asymptomatic high-risk women with cervical cerclage.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the performance of the predictive markers of spontaneous preterm birth, cervicovaginal quantitative fetal fibronectin (fFN) and cervical length, in asymptomatic high-risk women with transabdominal, history-indicated or ultrasound-indicated cervical cerclage. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort of asymptomatic high-risk women with cervical cerclage and no other prophylactic intervention (including progesterone), who attended the preterm birth clinic at a central London teaching hospital between October 2010 and September 2016. Women had either transabdominal cerclage, placed prior to conception, history-indicated cerclage, placed before 14 weeks' gestation, or ultrasound-indicated cerclage for a short cervix (< 25 mm), placed before 24 weeks. All women underwent serial cervical length assessment on transvaginal ultrasound in the second trimester (16-28 weeks), and quantitative fFN testing from 18 weeks onward. Test performance was analyzed for the prediction of spontaneous preterm birth before 30 weeks (cerclage failure), 34 weeks and 37 weeks, using receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC)-curve analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 181 women were included in the analysis. Cervical length and fFN were strong predictors of spontaneous preterm birth before 30 weeks in women with cerclage, with areas under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.94) and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.75-0.92), respectively. Cervical length was a better predictor of preterm birth before 30 weeks in women with history-indicated compared to those with ultrasound-indicated cerclage, although both showed clinical utility (AUC, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.91-1.00) vs 0.79 (95% CI, 0.66-0.91); P = 0.01). Quantitative fFN was a strong predictor of spontaneous preterm birth before 30 weeks in women with history-indicated cerclage (AUC, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.75-1.00)) and retained clinical utility in those with ultrasound-indicated cerclage (AUC, 0.76 (95% CI, 0.64-0.89)). There were no spontaneous deliveries before 34 weeks in women with a transabdominal cerclage, so AUC was not calculated. Delivery was delayed significantly in this group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Cervical length and quantitative fFN retain clinical utility for the prediction of spontaneous preterm birth in women with cervical cerclage, and prediction is best in women with a history-indicated stitch. These tests can be relied upon to discriminate risk and have utility when planning clinical management with regard to treatment failure. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

The minimally invasive approach to abdominal cerclage: indications, complications, and techniques for placement.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Laparoscopic abdominal cerclage placement has become the favored approach for management of refractory cervical insufficiency. There are special considerations with respect to surgical method, management of pregnancy loss, and delivery following placement. This review addresses current literature on transabdominal cerclage with a focus on up-to-date minimally invasive techniques. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent literature on abdominal cerclage has compared laparoscopic and open approaches, evaluated the effect of preconception placement on fertility, and explored the upper gestational limit for dilation and evacuation with an abdominal cerclage in situ . SUMMARY: The objective of this article is to help minimally invasive surgeons identify candidates for transabdominal cerclage placement, understand surgical risks, succeed in their laparoscopic approach, and appropriately manage patients postoperatively.