Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
MAVRIC: a multicenter randomized controlled trial of transabdominal vs transvaginal cervical cerclage.
Shennan, Andrew; Chandiramani, Manju; Bennett, Phillip; David, Anna L; Girling, Joanna; Ridout, Alexandra; Seed, Paul T; Simpson, Nigel; Thornton, Steven; Tydeman, Graham; Quenby, Siobhan; Carter, Jenny.
Afiliação
  • Shennan A; Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK. Electronic address: Andrew.shennan@kcl.ac.uk.
  • Chandiramani M; Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
  • Bennett P; Parturition Research Group, Institute of Reproductive and Development Biology, Imperial College London, London, UK.
  • David AL; UCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK.
  • Girling J; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, West Middlesex University Hospital, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesex, UK.
  • Ridout A; Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
  • Seed PT; Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
  • Simpson N; Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
  • Thornton S; Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
  • Tydeman G; Forth Park Hospital, Fife Hayfield House, Kirkcaldy, UK.
  • Quenby S; Division of Biomedical Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
  • Carter J; Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Am J Obstet Gynecol ; 222(3): 261.e1-261.e9, 2020 03.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31585096
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Vaginal cerclage (a suture around the cervix) commonly is placed in women with recurrent pregnancy loss. These women may experience late miscarriage or extreme preterm delivery, despite being treated with cerclage. Transabdominal cerclage has been advocated after failed cerclage, although its efficacy is unproved by randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of this study was to compare transabdominal cerclage or high vaginal cerclage with low vaginal cerclage in women with a history of failed cerclage. Our primary outcome was delivery at <32 completed weeks of pregnancy. STUDY

DESIGN:

This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Women were assigned randomly (111) to receive transabdominal cerclage, high vaginal cerclage, or low vaginal cerclage either before conception or at <14 weeks of gestation.

RESULTS:

The data for 111 of 139 women who were recruited and who conceived were analyzed 39 had transabdominal cerclage; 39 had high vaginal cerclage, and 33 had low vaginal cerclage. Rates of preterm birth at <32 weeks of gestation were significantly lower in women who received transabdominal cerclage compared with low vaginal cerclage (8% [3/39] vs 33% [11/33]; relative risk, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.76; P=.0157). The number needed to treat to prevent 1 preterm birth was 3.9 (95% confidence interval, 2.32-12.1). There was no difference in preterm birth rates between high and low vaginal cerclage (38% [15/39] vs 33% [11/33]; relative risk, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-2.16; P=.81). No neonatal deaths occurred. In an exploratory analysis, women with transabdominal cerclage had fewer fetal losses compared with low vaginal cerclage (3% [1/39] vs 21% [7/33]; relative risk, 0.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.016-0.93; P=.02). The number needed to treat to prevent 1 fetal loss was 5.3 (95% confidence interval, 2.9-26).

CONCLUSION:

Transabdominal cerclage is the treatment of choice for women with failed vaginal cerclage. It is superior to low vaginal cerclage in the reduction of risk of early preterm birth and fetal loss in women with previous failed vaginal cerclage. High vaginal cerclage does not confer this benefit. The numbers needed to treat are sufficiently low to justify transabdominal surgery and cesarean delivery required in this select cohort.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cerclagem Cervical / Nascimento Prematuro Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Pregnancy Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cerclagem Cervical / Nascimento Prematuro Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Pregnancy Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article