宫颈短的低风险孕妇的环扎术与阴道黄体酮

Olivet Martinez, H. Moran, S. Wolff, Charles P. Gibbs, Gene T. Lee, K. Gorman, Angela S. Martin
{"title":"宫颈短的低风险孕妇的环扎术与阴道黄体酮","authors":"Olivet Martinez, H. Moran, S. Wolff, Charles P. Gibbs, Gene T. Lee, K. Gorman, Angela S. Martin","doi":"10.1080/14767058.2022.2065193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective To compare vaginal progesterone to cerclage in preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, incidentally found sonographic cervical length of <15 mm, and no history of preterm birth. Study design A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 68 women who delivered at the University of Kansas Health System with a singleton gestation found to have a cervical length <15 mm on transvaginal ultrasound and no history of preterm birth. Women treated with vaginal progesterone (n = 29) were compared to women who underwent cerclage placement (n = 39). The primary outcome was preterm birth at <34 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes include preterm birth at <37 and <28 weeks of gestation and neonatal morbidities. Results Of the 268 patients who had a cervical length of <15 mm on transvaginal ultrasound, 68 participants met inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Twenty-nine participants received vaginal progesterone and 39 participants received cervical cerclage. The average cervical length at initiation of therapy was greater in the progesterone cohort versus cerclage cohort, respectively (10.5 vs. 8.0 mm, p < .01). All other baseline characteristics were similar between groups, including no difference in average gestational age at initiation of therapy (21.6 vs. 21.5 weeks, p = .87). Average latency after therapy did not differ between groups (100 vs. 92.7 days p = .43). The incidence of preterm birth at <37 weeks (OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.57–3.93), <34 weeks (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.52–4.18), and <28 weeks (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 0.45–8.07), did not differ significantly between groups. Additionally, no difference in neonatal morbidity was detected. Conclusion At our institution, we found no difference between vaginal progesterone and cerclage in the average latency period or risk of preterm birth among women with an incidental short cervix of <15 mm and no history of preterm birth, despite the significantly shorter initial cervical length in the cerclage group. These findings suggest either vaginal progesterone or cerclage could be used to reduce the risk of preterm birth among this high-risk population.","PeriodicalId":22921,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine","volume":"7 1","pages":"9878 - 9883"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cerclage versus vaginal progesterone in low-risk pregnant women with a short cervix\",\"authors\":\"Olivet Martinez, H. Moran, S. Wolff, Charles P. Gibbs, Gene T. Lee, K. Gorman, Angela S. Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14767058.2022.2065193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objective To compare vaginal progesterone to cerclage in preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, incidentally found sonographic cervical length of <15 mm, and no history of preterm birth. Study design A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 68 women who delivered at the University of Kansas Health System with a singleton gestation found to have a cervical length <15 mm on transvaginal ultrasound and no history of preterm birth. Women treated with vaginal progesterone (n = 29) were compared to women who underwent cerclage placement (n = 39). The primary outcome was preterm birth at <34 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes include preterm birth at <37 and <28 weeks of gestation and neonatal morbidities. Results Of the 268 patients who had a cervical length of <15 mm on transvaginal ultrasound, 68 participants met inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Twenty-nine participants received vaginal progesterone and 39 participants received cervical cerclage. The average cervical length at initiation of therapy was greater in the progesterone cohort versus cerclage cohort, respectively (10.5 vs. 8.0 mm, p < .01). All other baseline characteristics were similar between groups, including no difference in average gestational age at initiation of therapy (21.6 vs. 21.5 weeks, p = .87). Average latency after therapy did not differ between groups (100 vs. 92.7 days p = .43). The incidence of preterm birth at <37 weeks (OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.57–3.93), <34 weeks (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.52–4.18), and <28 weeks (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 0.45–8.07), did not differ significantly between groups. Additionally, no difference in neonatal morbidity was detected. Conclusion At our institution, we found no difference between vaginal progesterone and cerclage in the average latency period or risk of preterm birth among women with an incidental short cervix of <15 mm and no history of preterm birth, despite the significantly shorter initial cervical length in the cerclage group. These findings suggest either vaginal progesterone or cerclage could be used to reduce the risk of preterm birth among this high-risk population.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"9878 - 9883\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2022.2065193\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2022.2065193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要目的比较阴道孕酮与阴道环扎术对单胎妊娠、宫颈超声长度<15 mm、无早产史的孕妇预防早产及围产期不良结局的效果。研究设计一项回顾性队列研究对68名在堪萨斯大学卫生系统分娩的单胎妊娠妇女进行了研究,经阴道超声检查发现宫颈长度< 15mm,无早产史。接受阴道孕酮治疗的女性(n = 29)与接受环扎术的女性(n = 39)进行比较。主要结局是妊娠<34周的早产。次要结局包括妊娠<37周和<28周的早产和新生儿发病率。结果经阴道超声检查宫颈长度< 15mm的268例患者中,有68例符合纳入标准,纳入最终分析。29名参与者接受阴道黄体酮治疗,39名参与者接受宫颈环切术。治疗开始时,孕酮组的平均宫颈长度大于环扎组(10.5 mm vs 8.0 mm, p < 0.01)。所有其他基线特征在两组之间相似,包括治疗开始时的平均胎龄无差异(21.6周对21.5周,p = 0.87)。治疗后平均潜伏期在两组间无差异(100天vs. 92.7天p = 0.43)。<37周(OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.57-3.93)、<34周(OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.52-4.18)和<28周(OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 0.45-8.07)的早产发生率组间无显著差异。此外,没有发现新生儿发病率的差异。结论:在我们的机构,我们发现阴道孕酮和环扎术在意外短宫颈< 15mm且无早产史的妇女中,平均潜伏期和早产风险没有差异,尽管环扎术组的初始宫颈长度明显较短。这些发现表明,阴道黄体酮或环扎术都可以用于降低高危人群的早产风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cerclage versus vaginal progesterone in low-risk pregnant women with a short cervix
Abstract Objective To compare vaginal progesterone to cerclage in preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, incidentally found sonographic cervical length of <15 mm, and no history of preterm birth. Study design A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 68 women who delivered at the University of Kansas Health System with a singleton gestation found to have a cervical length <15 mm on transvaginal ultrasound and no history of preterm birth. Women treated with vaginal progesterone (n = 29) were compared to women who underwent cerclage placement (n = 39). The primary outcome was preterm birth at <34 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes include preterm birth at <37 and <28 weeks of gestation and neonatal morbidities. Results Of the 268 patients who had a cervical length of <15 mm on transvaginal ultrasound, 68 participants met inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Twenty-nine participants received vaginal progesterone and 39 participants received cervical cerclage. The average cervical length at initiation of therapy was greater in the progesterone cohort versus cerclage cohort, respectively (10.5 vs. 8.0 mm, p < .01). All other baseline characteristics were similar between groups, including no difference in average gestational age at initiation of therapy (21.6 vs. 21.5 weeks, p = .87). Average latency after therapy did not differ between groups (100 vs. 92.7 days p = .43). The incidence of preterm birth at <37 weeks (OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.57–3.93), <34 weeks (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.52–4.18), and <28 weeks (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 0.45–8.07), did not differ significantly between groups. Additionally, no difference in neonatal morbidity was detected. Conclusion At our institution, we found no difference between vaginal progesterone and cerclage in the average latency period or risk of preterm birth among women with an incidental short cervix of <15 mm and no history of preterm birth, despite the significantly shorter initial cervical length in the cerclage group. These findings suggest either vaginal progesterone or cerclage could be used to reduce the risk of preterm birth among this high-risk population.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The impact of specialty training and physician attitudes on fetal cardiac counseling Fetoplacental unit involvement in uric acid production in women with severe preeclampsia: a prospective case control pilot study. Causal association of sex hormone-binding globulin on gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study Targeted metabolomic analysis of early-trimester serum identifies potential mechanisms for late-onset preeclampsia Statement of retraction: effect of daily consumption of probiotic yoghurt on lipid profiles in pregnant women: a randomized controlled clinical trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1