Comparision of pregnancy outcomes of history indicated and ultrasound indicated cervical cerclage: a prospective cohort study

Pooja Hombardi; Gayatri L. Patil; Tejaswi V. Pujar; Shama Anjum

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20251246

Authors

Pooja Hombardi Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SSIMS & RC, Davanagere, Karnataka, India
Gayatri L. Patil Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SSIMS & RC, Davanagere, Karnataka, India
Tejaswi V. Pujar Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SSIMS & RC, Davanagere, Karnataka, India
Shama Anjum Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SSIMS & RC, Davanagere, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20251246

Keywords:

Cervical insufficiency, Cerclage, Preterm birth, Prevention

Abstract

Background: Cervical cerclage is a widely used intervention to prevent preterm birth in women at risk for cervical insufficiency. Indications for cervical cerclage may arise from clinical history or clinical finding of cervical shortening and or dilatation or ultrasound guided cervical length measurements in pregnancy. Despite its widespread use, there is ongoing debate about which indication yields better pregnancy and neonatal outcomes.

Methods: Prospective cohort study included pregnant women who underwent cervical cerclage due to either history of preterm birth or findings from cervical ultrasound. Key outcomes such as gestational age at delivery, incidence of preterm birth, neonatal birth weight, NICU admissions, and APGAR scores were analyzed. Statistical methods included chi-square tests for categorical data and independent t-tests for continuous data, with a significance threshold set at p<0.05.

Results: The study found that both history-indicated and ultrasound-indicated cervical cerclage were effective in prolonging pregnancy and preventing preterm birth. In our study, history indicated cerclage resulted in lower rate of preterm births and better neonatal outcomes compared to ultrasound indicated cerclage. Although there were differences in gestational age at delivery and neonatal outcomes between the two groups, these differences were not always statistically significant.

Conclusions: This study suggests that both history-indicated and ultrasound-indicated transvaginal cervical cerclage as an effective clinical treatment for cervical insufficiency.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Morton VH, Hobson PT, Mookes C, Middleton L, Daniels J, Simpson N, et al. Monofilament suture versus braided suture thread to improve pregnancy outcomes after vaginal cervical cerclage: a pragmatic randomised, controlled, phase III, superiority trial. The Lancet 2022;400:1426-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01808-6

Goldenberg RL, Culhane JF, Iams JD, Romero R. Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth. Lancet. 2008;371(9606):75-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60074-4

Eleje GU, Eke AC, Ikechebelu JI, Ezebialu IU, Okam PC, Ilika CP. Cervical stitch (cerclage) in combination with other treatments for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in singleton pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;9(9):CD012871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012871.pub2

ACOG Practice Bulletin No.142: Cerclage for the management of cervical insufficiency. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(2 Pt 1):372-379. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000443276.68274.cc

Brown R, Gagnon R, Delisle MF. No. 373-Cervical insufficiency and cervical cerclage. J ObstetGynaecol Can. 2019;41(2):233-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2018.08.009

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM). Temming L, Mikhail E., SMFM Publications Committee. Electronic address: pubs@smfm.org. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #65: Transabdominal cerclage. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023;228(6):B2-B10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2023.02.018

Bieber KB, Olson SM. Cervical Cerclage. [Updated 2023 Jul 25]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/ NBK560523/. Accessed 12 January 2025.

Shennan A, Story L, Jacobsson B, Grobman WA; the FIGO Working Group for Preterm Birth. FIGO good practice recommendations on cervical cerclage for prevention of preterm birth. Int J GynecolObstet. 2021;155:19-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.13835

Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Medley N. Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;6(6):CD008991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008991.pub3

Berghella V, Szychowski JM, Owen J, Hankins G, Iams JD, Sheffield JS, et al. Suture type and ultrasound-indicated cerclage efficacy. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25(11):2287-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2012.688081

McAuliffe L, Issah A, Diacci R, Williams KP, Aubin AM, Phung J, et al. McDonald versus Shirodkar cerclage technique in the prevention of preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2023;130(7):702-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17438

Song HS, Choo GY, Jin LH, Yoon SM, Lee T. Transvaginal cystocele repair by purse-string technique reinforced with three simple sutures: surgical technique and results. Int Neurourol J. 2012;16(3):144-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5213/inj.2012.16.3.144

Tusheva OA, Cohen SL, McElrath TF, Einarsson JI. Laparoscopic placement of cervical cerclage. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2012;5(3-4):e158-65.

Drakeley AJ, Roberts D, Alfirevic Z. Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing pregnancy loss in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;2003(1):CD003253. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003253

Reicher L, Fouks Y, Yogev Y. Cervical Assessment for Predicting Preterm Birth-Cervical Length and Beyond. J Clin Med. 2021;10(4):627. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10040627

O'Hara S, Zelesco M, Sun Z. Cervical length for predicting preterm birth and a comparison of ultrasonic measurement techniques. Australas J Ultrasound Med. 2013 Aug;16(3):124-134. Erratum in: Australas J Ultrasound Med. 2013;16(4):210-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2205-0140.2013.tb00100.x

Harger JH. Cerclage and cervical insufficiency: an evidence-based analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100(6):1313-27. Erratum in: Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101(1):205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(02)02365-7

Conde-Agudelo A, Romero R, Nicolaides K, Chaiworapongsa T, O'Brien JM, Cetingoz E, et al. Vaginal progesterone vs. cervical cerclage for the prevention of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix, previous preterm birth, and singleton gestation: a systematic review and indirect comparison metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208(1):42.e1-42.e18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.10.877

Aubin AM, McAuliffe L, Williams K, Issah A, Diacci R, McAuliffe JE, et al. Combined vaginal progesterone and cervical cerclage in the prevention of preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023;5(8):101024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101024

Berghella V, Odibo AO, To MS, Rust OA, Althuisius SM. Cerclage for short cervix on ultrasonography in women with singleton gestations: A meta-analysis. ObstetGynecol 2011;117(3):663-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31820ca847

Owen J, Hankins G, Iams JD, Berghella V, Sheffield JS, Perez-Delboy A, et al. Multicenter randomized trial of cerclage for preterm birth prevention in high-risk women with shortened midtrimester cervical length. Am J ObstetGynecol 2009;201(4):375.e1-375.e8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.015