Viable extreme preterm birth and some neonatal outcomes in double cerclage versus traditional cerclage: a randomized clinical trial

Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Cervical cerclage is a well-known surgical procedure carried out during pregnancy. It involves positioning of a suture (stitch) around the neck of the womb (cervix), aiming to give mechanical support to the cervix and thereby reduce risk of preterm birth. The effectiveness and safety of this procedure remains controversial. This is an update of a review last published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the use of cervical stitch in singleton pregnancy at high risk of pregnancy loss based on woman's history and/or ultrasound finding of 'short cervix' and/or physical exam improves subsequent obstetric care and fetal outcome.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (30 June 2016) and reference lists of identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials of cervical suturing in singleton pregnancies. Cervical stitch was carried out when the pregnancy was considered to be of sufficiently high risk due to a woman's history, a finding of short cervix on ultrasound or other indication determined by physical exam. We included any study that compared cerclage with either no treatment or any alternative intervention. We planned to include cluster-randomised studies but not cross-over trials. We excluded quasi-randomised studies. We included studies reported in abstract form only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We resolved discrepancies by discussion. Data were checked for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review includes a total of 15 trials (3490 women); three trials were added for this update (152 women). Cerclage versus no cerclageOverall, cerclage probably leads to a reduced risk of perinatal death when compared with no cerclage, although the confidence interval (CI) crosses the line of no effect (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.04; 10 studies, 2927 women; moderate quality evidence). Considering stillbirths and neonatal deaths separately reduced the numbers of events and sample size. Although the relative effect of cerclage is similar, estimates were less reliable with fewer data and assessed as of low quality (stillbirths RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.75; 5 studies, 1803 women; low quality evidence; neonatal deaths before discharge RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.39; 6 studies, 1714 women; low quality evidence). Serious neonatal morbidity was similar with and without cerclage (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.18; 6 studies, 883 women; low-quality evidence). Pregnant women with and without cerclage were equally likely to have a baby discharged home healthy (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.06; 4 studies, 657 women; moderate quality evidence).Pregnant women with cerclage were less likely to have preterm births compared to controls before 37, 34 (average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.89; 9 studies, 2415 women; high quality evidence) and 28 completed weeks of gestation.Five subgroups based on clinical indication provided data for analysis (history-indicated; short cervix based on one-off ultrasound in high risk women; short cervix found by serial scans in high risk women; physical exam-indicated; and short cervix found on scan in low risk or mixed populations). There were too few trials in these clinical subgroups to make meaningful conclusions and no evidence of differential effects. Cerclage versus progesteroneTwo trials (129 women) compared cerclage to prevention with vaginal progesterone in high risk women with short cervix on ultrasound; these trials were too small to detect reliable, clinically important differences for any review outcome. One included trial compared cerclage with intramuscular progesterone (75 women) which lacked power to detect group differences. History indicated cerclage versus ultrasound indicated cerclageEvidence from two trials (344 women) was too limited to establish differences for clinically important outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Cervical cerclage reduces the risk of preterm birth in women at high-risk of preterm birth and probably reduces risk of perinatal deaths. There was no evidence of any differential effect of cerclage based on previous obstetric history or short cervix indications, but data were limited for all clinical groups. The question of whether cerclage is more or less effective than other preventative treatments, particularly vaginal progesterone, remains unanswered.

[Cervical cerclage]

Cervical cerclage aims to strengthen not only the mechanical properties of the cervix, but also its immunological and anti-infectious functions. The demonstration of a strong interrelation between cervical insufficiency as well as decreased cervical length at endo-vaginal ultrasonography and infection has changed the indications cerclage. Actually we can distinguish three indications for cerclage: prophylactic, for obstetrical history; therapeutic, for shortened cervical length at ultrasonography in patients at risk and; emergency cerclage in case of threatening cervix at physical examination. The McDonald's technique is the most recommended. In case of failure, it is proposed to realize cerclage at a higher level on the cervix either by vaginal or abdominal route.

Double versus single cervical cerclage for patients with recurrent pregnancy loss: a randomized clinical trial

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of the double cervical cerclage method versus the single method in women with recurrent second-trimester delivery.

METHOD

In this randomized clinical trial, we included 33 singleton pregnancies suffering from recurrent second-trimester pregnancy loss (≥2 consecutive fetal loss during second-trimester or with a history of unsuccessful procedures utilizing the McDonald method), due to cervical incompetence. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo either the classic McDonald method (n = 14) or the double cerclage method (n = 19). The successful pregnancy rate and gestational age at delivery was also compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The two study groups were comparable regarding their baseline characteristics. The successful pregnancy rate did not differ significantly between those who underwent the double cerclage method or the classic McDonald cerclage method (100% vs 85.7%; P = 0.172). In the same way, the preterm delivery rate (<34 weeks of gestation) was comparable between the two study groups (10.5% vs 35.7%; P = 0.106). Those undergoing the double cerclage method had longer gestational duration (37.2 ± 2.6 vs 34.3 ± 3.8 weeks; P = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

The double cervical cerclage method seems to provide better cervical support, as compared with the classic McDonald cerclage method, in those suffering from recurrent pregnancy loss, due to cervical incompetence.

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

OBJECTIVE

No randomized controlled trial has compared vaginal progesterone and cervical cerclage directly for the prevention of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix in the mid trimester, singleton gestation, and previous spontaneous preterm birth. We performed an indirect comparison of vaginal progesterone vs cerclage using placebo/no cerclage as the common comparator.

STUDY DESIGN

Adjusted indirect metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials.

RESULTS

Four studies that evaluated vaginal progesterone vs placebo (158 patients) and 5 studies that evaluated cerclage vs no cerclage (504 patients) were included. Both interventions were associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of preterm birth at <32 weeks of gestation and composite perinatal morbidity and mortality compared with placebo/no cerclage. Adjusted indirect metaanalyses did not show statistically significant differences between vaginal progesterone and cerclage in the reduction of preterm birth or adverse perinatal outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Based on state-of-the-art methods for indirect comparisons, either vaginal progesterone or cerclage are equally efficacious in the prevention of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix in the mid trimester, singleton gestation, and previous preterm birth. Selection of the optimal treatment needs to consider adverse events, cost and patient/clinician preferences.

Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Cervical cerclage is a well-known surgical procedure carried out during pregnancy. It involves positioning of a suture (stitch) around the neck of the womb (cervix), aiming to give a mechanical support to the cervix and thereby reducing the risk of preterm birth. The effectiveness and safety of this procedure remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the use of cervical stitch in singleton pregnancy at high risk of pregnancy loss based on a woman's history and/or ultrasound finding of 'short cervix' and/or physical exam improves subsequent obstetric care and fetal outcome.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2011) and reference lists of identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials of cervical suturing in singleton pregnancies carried out when pregnancy was considered to be at sufficiently high risk of pregnancy loss for cerclage to be potentially indicated. We included any study that compared cerclage with either no treatment or any alternative intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 trials (involving 3328 women). When cerclage was compared with no treatment, there was no statistically significant difference in perinatal deaths (8.4% versus 10.7%) (risk ratio (RR) 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.00; eight trials, 2391 women) and neonatal morbidity (9.6% versus 10.2%) (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.43; four trials, 818 women), despite significant reduction in preterm births (average RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.95; nine trials, 2898 women). Cervical cerclage was associated with the higher rate of maternal side effects (vaginal discharge and bleeding, pyrexia) (average RR 2.25; 95% CI 0.89 to 5.69; three trials, 953 women). Caesarean section rates were significantly higher after cervical cerclage (RR 1.19; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.40; 8 trials, 2817 women).There was no evidence of any important differences across all prespecified clinical subgroups (history-indicated, ultrasound-indicated)One study that compared cerclage with weekly intramuscular injections of 17 α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate in women with a short cervix detected by transvaginal ultrasound, failed to reveal any obvious differences in obstetric and neonatal outcomes between the two management strategies.Two studies compared the benefits of performing cerclage based on previous history with cerclage, only if the cervix was found to be short on transvaginal ultrasound. There was no significant difference in any of the primary and secondary outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with no treatment, cervical cerclage reduces the incidence of preterm birth in women at risk of recurrent preterm birth without statistically significant reduction in perinatal mortality or neonatal morbidity and uncertain long-term impact on the baby. Ceasarean section is more likely in women who had cervical suture inserted during pregnancy.The decision on how best to minimise the risk of recurrent preterm birth in women at risk, either because of poor history of a short or dilated cervix, should be 'personalised', based on the clinical circumstances, the skill and expertise of the clinical team and, most importantly, woman's informed choice.