Daphna Amitai Komem, Raanan Meyer, Itai Yagel, Daniel Shai, Roy Mashiach, Israel Hendler, Shali Mazaki-Tovi, Yoav Yinon
{"title":"Ultrasound-indicated and physical examination-indicated cervical cerclage in twin versus singleton gestations","authors":"Daphna Amitai Komem, Raanan Meyer, Itai Yagel, Daniel Shai, Roy Mashiach, Israel Hendler, Shali Mazaki-Tovi, Yoav Yinon","doi":"10.1111/jog.16263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>To compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound- and physical examination-indicated cervical cerclage in twin versus singleton gestations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A retrospective cohort study of all ultrasound-indicated (cervical length ≤ 25 mm) and physical examination-indicated cerclage cases performed over a 9-year period. The primary outcome was the time interval from cerclage placement to delivery.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The study cohort included 94 singleton and 16 twin pregnancies. The time interval from cerclage placement to delivery was comparable in singleton and twin gestations (14.77 vs. 12.07 weeks, <i>p</i> = 0.11), as were the rates of preterm births before 28 and 32 weeks. The rate of alive newborns >24 weeks was lower in the twin group (71.9% vs. 88.3%, <i>p</i> = 0.028). Regression analysis identified that cervical dilation, but not twin gestation, was the only factor independently associated with an increased risk for birth before 32 weeks.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Ultrasound-indicated and physical examination-indicated cerclage had comparable efficacy in prolonging pregnancy in twin and singleton gestations, though live birth rates were lower in twins.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16593,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research","volume":"51 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jog.16263","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jog.16263","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim
To compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound- and physical examination-indicated cervical cerclage in twin versus singleton gestations.
Methods
A retrospective cohort study of all ultrasound-indicated (cervical length ≤ 25 mm) and physical examination-indicated cerclage cases performed over a 9-year period. The primary outcome was the time interval from cerclage placement to delivery.
Results
The study cohort included 94 singleton and 16 twin pregnancies. The time interval from cerclage placement to delivery was comparable in singleton and twin gestations (14.77 vs. 12.07 weeks, p = 0.11), as were the rates of preterm births before 28 and 32 weeks. The rate of alive newborns >24 weeks was lower in the twin group (71.9% vs. 88.3%, p = 0.028). Regression analysis identified that cervical dilation, but not twin gestation, was the only factor independently associated with an increased risk for birth before 32 weeks.
Conclusion
Ultrasound-indicated and physical examination-indicated cerclage had comparable efficacy in prolonging pregnancy in twin and singleton gestations, though live birth rates were lower in twins.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research is the official Journal of the Asia and Oceania Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology and of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and aims to provide a medium for the publication of articles in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology.
The Journal publishes original research articles, case reports, review articles and letters to the editor. The Journal will give publication priority to original research articles over case reports. Accepted papers become the exclusive licence of the Journal. Manuscripts are peer reviewed by at least two referees and/or Associate Editors expert in the field of the submitted paper.