DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20172114

Evaluation of the anterior cervical angle of the uterus to predict spontaneous preterm birth

Bijay Sur, Sujata Misra, Sanghamitra Dash

Abstract


Background: This prospective observational study was conducted to evaluate the anterior cervical angle (ACA) of the uterus by transvaginal sonography (TVS) and to determine the feasibility to predict spontaneous preterm birth (PTB). The duration of the study was from December 2014-December 2016.The participants included 100 pregnant women with singleton pregnancy who were asymptomatic. They were enrolled after excluding all known risk factors of preterm birth.

Methods: The ACA and cervical length were measured in all cases by transvaginal sonography either in the 1st trimester or 2nd trimester. All cases were followed and well documented with respect to the gestational age at delivery.

Results: There was a significant risk of preterm labour in women with cervical length <2.5cm in the 2nd trimester with Odds Ratio 3.625, P value=0.001, sensitivity 75% and specificity 79.31%. The positive predictive value was 33.33% and negative predictive value 95.83%. The false positive rate was 20.65% and false negative rate 25%. The difference of mean cervical angle in women who delivered preterm and that of those who delivered at term, in the 1st    trimester (preterm group 114.2°Vs term group 93.0°, P<0.001) and in the 2nd trimester (preterm group 127.66° Vs term group 103.65°, P <0.001) was significant. An ACA of 114.2° in the 1st trimester was associated with a risk of spontaneous preterm birth (P value 0.0065, sensitivity 90% and specificity 80%). An ACA of 127.66° in 2nd trimester was associated with a risk of spontaneous preterm birth (P value 0.0004, sensitivity 80%and specificity 88.23%).

Conclusions: Despite the limitations of a small sample size, the results suggest that the anterior cervical angle has potential as a new predictor of spontaneous preterm birth especially when measured in the 1st trimester.


Keywords


Anterior cervical angle, Preterm birth, Transvaginal sonography

Full Text:

PDF

References


A South Asian Perspective. Arias Practical Guide to high-risk pregnancy and delivery. Editors Arias F, Bhide A, Arulkumaran S, Damania K, Daftary S. (4th Ed); 2015 Chapter 8:135.

WHO Fact sheet Reviewed November 2016-Avaialble from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs363/en.

National Health Portal Gateway to authentic health information. Available from: www.nhp.gov.in

Sochacki-Wojcicka N, Wojcicki J, Bomba-Opon ´D, Wielgos M. Anterior cervical angle as a new biophysical ultrasound marker for prediction of spontaneous preterm birth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:376-9.

Bloom SL. Recurrence of preterm birth in single term and twin pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98:379.

Yamashita M, Hayashi S, Endo M, Okuno K, Fukui O, Mimura K et al. Obstetric research collaborative in Osaka (ORCO). J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2015;41(11):1708-14.

Mazaki-Tovi S, Romero R, Kusanovic JP, Erez O, Pineles BL, Gotsch F et al. Recurrent preterm birth. Semin Perinatol. 2007;31(3):142-58.

Banicevic AC, Popovic M, Ceric A. Cervical length measured by transvaginal ultrasonography and cervicovaginal infection as predictor of preterm birth risk. Acta Inform Med. 2014;22(2):128-32.

Boelig RC, Orzechowski KM, Berghella V. Cervical length, risk factors, and delivery outcomes among women with spontaneous preterm birth. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016 Sep;29(17):2840-4.

Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, Mercer BM, Moawad A, Das A et al. The length of the cervix the risk of spontaneous premature delivery. N Engl J Medicine. 1996;44(3):292-4.

Sochacki‐Wójcicka N, Wojcicki J, Bomba‐Opon D, Wielgos M. Anterior cervical angle as a new biophysical ultrasound marker for prediction of spontaneous preterm birth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46(3):377-8.

Dziadosz M, Bennett TA, Dolin C, Honart AW, Pham A, Lee SS et al. Uterocervical angle: a novel ultrasound screening tool to predict spontaneous preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(3):376.e1-7.