Seda Yüksel ŞİMŞEK
(Başkent Üniversitesi, Adana Dr. Turgut Noyan Uygulama ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Kliniği, Ankara, Türkiye)
Erhan ŞİMŞEK
(Başkent Üniversitesi, Adana Dr. Turgut Noyan Uygulama ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Kliniği, Ankara, Türkiye)
Gülşen Doğan DURDAĞ
(Başkent Üniversitesi, Adana Dr. Turgut Noyan Uygulama ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Kliniği, Ankara, Türkiye)
Songül ALEMDAROĞLU
(Başkent Üniversitesi, Adana Dr. Turgut Noyan Uygulama ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Kliniği, Ankara, Türkiye)
Şafak Yılmaz BARAN
(Başkent Üniversitesi, Adana Dr. Turgut Noyan Uygulama ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Kliniği, Ankara, Türkiye)
Hakan KALAYCI
(Başkent Üniversitesi, Adana Dr. Turgut Noyan Uygulama ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Kliniği, Ankara, Türkiye)
Yıl: 2021Cilt: 22Sayı: 1ISSN: 1309-0399 / 1309-0380Sayfa Aralığı: 22 - 28İngilizce

91 0
Prevention of preterm delivery by cervical cerclage; a comparison of prophylactic and emergency procedures
Objective: Prophylactic or emergency type cervical cerclage procedures are being used for treatment of cervical insufficiency. The aim was to review and compare the outcomes of these cerclage types and identify factors affecting outcomes.Material and Methods: Retrospective review of seventy-five patients in whom transvaginal cervical cerclage procedures were performed over a seven-year period in a tertiary referral center.Results: Twenty seven of 75 (36%) patients were in the emergency cerclage group and 48 (64%) of them were in the prophylactic group. Mean body mass index (BMI), hospitalization time and gestational week at cerclage were significantly higher, whereas latency period was significantly shorter for the emergency group. Mean gestational ages at delivery were 35.6±4.5 and 33.6±5.9 weeks in the prophylactic and emergency groups, respectively (p=0.117). Delivery rates under 34th gestational week were 20.8% and 37.0% in the prophylactic and emergency groups, respectively (p=0.175). Birthweight, and delivery ≥34th gestational week was higher in the prophylactic group, whereas complication rate was higher in the emergency group, but these differences were not significant. High BMI was associated with more deliveries before 34-week in the prophylactic group. Pre-cerclage cervical length was shorter in patients who delivered before 34 gestational weeks at delivery.Conclusion: Prophylactic and emergency cerclage procedures have comparable results regarding gestational week at delivery. High BMI and low pre-cerclage cervical length may have adverse effects on success of cerclage procedures. (J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 2021; 22: 22-8)
DergiAraştırma MakalesiErişime Açık
  • 1. Brown R, Gagnon R, Delisle MF, Maternal Fetal Medicine Committee. Cervical insufficiency and cervical cerclage. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2013; 35: 1115-27.
  • 2. ACOG practice bulletin no.142: Cerclage for the management of cervical insufficiency. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123(2 Pt 1): 372-79.
  • 3. Grobman W. 532: Short cervix and activity restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208: S227-8.
  • 4. Goya M, Pratcorona L, Merced C, Rodó C, Valle L, Romero A, et al. Cervical pessary in pregnant women with a short cervix (PECEP): an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2012; 379: 1800- 6.
  • 5. Nicolaides KH, Syngelaki A, Poon LC, Matallana CP, Plasencia W, Molina FS, et al. Cervical pessary placement for prevention of preterm birth in unselected twin pregnancies: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 214: 3.e1-9.
  • 6. Hoffman MC, McCarthy L, Heinrichs G, Hyer J, Carey JC. 818: Activity restriction does not slow the rate of cervical shortening in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210.
  • 7. Odibo AO. Berghella V, To MS, Rust OA, Althuisius SM , Nicolaides KH. Shirodkar versus McDonald cerclage for the prevention of preterm birth in women with short cervical length. Am J Perinatol 2007; 24: 55-60.
  • 8. Brown JA, Pearson AW, Veillon EW, Rust OA, Chauhan SP, Magann EF, et al. History- or ultrasound-based cerclage placement and adverse perinatal outcomes. J Reprod Med 2011; 56: 385-92.
  • 9. Simcox R, Seed PT, Bennett P, Teoh TG, Poston L, Shennan AH. A randomized controlled trial of cervical scanning vs history to determine cerclage in women at high risk of preterm birth (CIRCLE trial). Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 200: 623.e1-6.
  • 10. Gluck O, Mizrachi Y, Ginath S, Bar J, Sagiv R. Obstetrical outcomes of emergency compared with elective cervical cerclage. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2017; 30: 1650-4.
  • 11. Liddiard A, Bhattacharya S, Crichton L. Elective and emergency cervical cerclage and immediate pregnancy outcomes: a retrospective observational study. JRSM Short Rep 2011; 2: 91.
  • 12. Chen Q, Chen G, Li N. Clinical effect of emergency cervical cerclage and elective cervical cerclage on pregnancy outcome in the cervical-incompetent pregnant women. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2018; 297: 401-7.
  • 13. Berghella V, Mackeen AD. Cervical length screening with ultrasound-indicated cerclage compared with history-indicated cerclage for prevention of preterm birth: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118: 148-55.
  • 14. Suhag A, Seligman N, Giraldo-Isaza M, Berghella V. Pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) and cerclage success. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016; 29: 368-75.
  • 15. Yalvac S, Esin S, Kocak O, Yirci B, Kandemir O. Effect of body mass index on latency periods after history-indicated cervical cerclage. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2014; 54: 121-5.
  • 16. Figueroa R, Crowell R, Martinez A, Morgan M, Wakefield D. McDonald versus Shirodkar cervical cerclage for the prevention of preterm birth: impact of body mass index. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019; 32: 3408-14.
  • 17. Poggi SH, Vyas NA, Pezzullo JC, Landy HJ, Ghidini A. Does increasing body mass index affect cerclage efficacy? J Perinatol 2012; 32: 777- 9.
  • 18. Zhao Z, Zhao X, Lu J, Xue J, Liu P, Mao H. Prognostic roles of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and platelet to lymphocyte ratio in ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis of retrospective studies. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2018; 297: 849-57.
  • 19. Chen L, Wang X, Shu J, Xu S, Wu Q, Yu Y. Diagnostic value of serum D-dimer, CA125, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in differentiating ovarian cancer and endometriosis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2019; 147: 212-8.
  • 20. Yilmaz M, Cimilli G, Saritemur M, Demircan F, Isaoglu U, Kisaoglu A, Emet M. Diagnostic Accuracy of Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio, Red Cell Distribution Width and Platelet Distribution Width in Ovarian Torsion. J Obstet Gynaecol 2016; 36: 218-22.
  • 21. Gogoi P, Sinha P, Gupta B, Firmal P, Rajaram S. Neutrophil-tolymphocyte ratio and platelet indices in pre-eclampsia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2019; 144: 16-20.
  • 22. Song JE, Lee KY, Son GH. Prognostic significance of neutrophilto-lymphocyte ratio for repeat cerclage in women with prolapsed membranes. Biomed Res Int 2018; 2018: 150739

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © 2019 Tüm Hakları Saklıdır.