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

Abstract

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 24^0/7 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.

Keywords

cervical insufficiency - advanced cervical dilation - preterm birth - cerclage

Note

This paper was presented as a poster at the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine 43^rd Annual Meeting—The pregnancy meeting, San Francisco, CA (February 6–February 11, 2023).

Publication History

Received: 11 October 2023

Accepted: 01 November 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
03 November 2023

Article published online:
12 December 2023

• References

• 1 Manuck TA, Rice MM, Bailit JL. et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Preterm neonatal morbidity and mortality by gestational age: a contemporary cohort. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 215 (01) 103.e1-103.e14
• 2 Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJ. Births: provisional data for 2021. 2022
• 3 Hughes K, Kane SC, Araujo Júnior E, Da Silva Costa F, Sheehan PM. Cervical length as a predictor for spontaneous preterm birth in high-risk singleton pregnancy: current knowledge. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 48 (01) 7-15
• 4 Ehsanipoor RM, Seligman NS, Saccone G. et al. Physical examination–indicated cerclage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 126 (01) 125-135
• 5 ACOG Practice Bulletin No.142: cerclage for the management of cervical insufficiency. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123 (2 Pt 1): 372-379
• 6 Berghella V, Odibo AO, To MS, Rust OA, Althuisius SM. Cerclage for short cervix on ultrasonography: meta-analysis of trials using individual patient-level data. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106 (01) 181-189
• 7 Berghella V, Seibel-Seamon J. Contemporary use of cervical cerclage. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2007; 50 (02) 468-477
• 8 Romero R, Conde-Agudelo A, Da Fonseca E. et al. Vaginal progesterone for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a short cervix: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 218 (02) 161-180
• 9 Cnattingius S, Villamor E, Johansson S. et al. Maternal obesity and risk of preterm delivery. JAMA 2013; 309 (22) 2362-2370
• 10 Ferré C, Callaghan W, Olson C, Sharma A, Barfield W. Effects of maternal age and age-specific preterm birth rates on overall preterm birth rates—United States, 2007 and 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2016; 65 (43) 1181-1184
• 11 Althuisius SM, Dekker GA, Hummel P, van Geijn HP. Cervical Incompetence Prevention Randomized Cerclage Trial. Cervical incompetence prevention randomized cerclage trial: emergency cerclage with bed rest versus bed rest alone. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189 (04) 907-910
• 12 Costa MMF, Amorim Filho AG, Barros MF. et al. Emergency cerclage: gestational and neonatal outcomes. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2019; 65 (05) 598-602
• 13 Abu Hashim H, Al-Inany H, Kilani Z. A review of the contemporary evidence on rescue cervical cerclage. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2014; 124 (03) 198-203
• 14 Mitra AG, Katz VL, Bowes Jr WA, Carmichael S. Emergency cerclages: a review of 40 consecutive procedures. Am J Perinatol 1992; 9 (03) 142-145
• 15 Yip S-K, Fung HYM, Fung T-Y. Emergency cervical cerclage: a study between duration of cerclage in situ with gestation at cerclage, herniation of forewater, and cervical dilatation at presentation. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1998; 78 (01) 63-67
• 16 Caruso A, Trivellini C, De Carolis S, Paradisi G, Mancuso S, Ferrazzani S. Emergency cerclage in the presence of protruding membranes: is pregnancy outcome predictable?. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2000; 79 (04) 265-268
• 17 Gupta M, Emary K, Impey L. Emergency cervical cerclage: predictors of success. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010; 23 (07) 670-674
• 18 Bigelow CA, Naqvi M, Namath AG, Ali M, Fox NS. Cervical length, cervical dilation, and gestational age at cerclage placement and the risk of preterm birth in women undergoing ultrasound or exam indicated Shirodkar cerclage. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2020; 33 (15) 2527-2532
• 19 Naqvi M, Barth Jr WH. Emergency cerclage: outcomes, patient selection, and operative considerations. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2016; 59 (02) 286-294
• 20 Uzun Cilingir I, Sayin C, Sutcu H. et al. Does emergency cerclage really works in patients with advanced cervical dilatation?. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2019; 48 (06) 387-390
• 21 Wierzchowska-Opoka M, Kimber-Trojnar Ż, Leszczyńska-Gorzelak B. Emergency cervical cerclage. J Clin Med 2021; 10 (06) 1270
• 22 Fuchs F, Senat MV, Fernandez H, Gervaise A, Frydman R, Bouyer J. Predictive score for early preterm birth in decisions about emergency cervical cerclage in singleton pregnancies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2012; 91 (06) 744-749
• 23 Steenhaut P, Hubinont C, Bernard P, Debiève F. Retrospective comparison of perinatal outcomes following emergency cervical cerclage with or without prolapsed membranes. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2017; 137 (03) 260-264