Cervical Insufficiency

doi:10.1017/9781108975780.010

Chapter 8 - Cervical Insufficiency

from Section 1 - Obstetric Aspects of Antenatal Care

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 February 2023

Marie-Julie Trahan ,

Amira El-Messidi and

Richard Brown

Edited by

Amira El-Messidi and

Alan D. Cameron

Show author details

Amira El-Messidi: Affiliation:
McGill University, Montréal
Alan D. Cameron: Affiliation:
University of Glasgow

Book contents

Get access

Summary

A 30-year-old G6P2A4L1 is referred by her primary care provider to your high-risk obstetrics clinic for preconception counseling after a pregnancy loss at 21+4 weeks’ gestation last year, shortly after incidental transvaginal cervical shortening was noted at second-trimester fetal morphology survey. After an uncomplicated first pregnancy and term delivery, she experienced four consecutive first-trimester losses for which comprehensive investigations were unremarkable.

Keywords

Short cervix Cervical insufficiency Singleton pregnancy Risk factors Investigations Preconception counseling Prenatal management Antepartum prevention Intrapartum prevention Transvaginal sonography, technique Cerclage: transvaginal, transabdominal, contraindications, patient consent, clinical management, prolapsed amniotic membranes preterm premature rupture of membranes

Type: Chapter
Information: OSCEs in Obstetrics and Maternal-Fetal Medicine
An Evidence-Based Approach
, pp. 96 - 108

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108975780.010 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Suggested Readings

ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 142: cerclage for the management of cervical insufficiency. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(2 Pt 1):372–379.Google Scholar

(a) Alfirevic, Z, Stampalija, T, Medley, N. Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;6(6):CD008991.Google Scholar PubMed

Eleje, GU, Eke, AC, Ikechebelu, JI, et al. Cervical stitch (cerclage) in combination with other treatments for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in singleton pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;9(9):CD012871.Google Scholar

Conde-Agudelo, A, Romero, R, Nicolaides, KH. Cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth in asymptomatic high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;223(1):42–65.Google Scholar

Gluck, O, Mizrachi, Y, Ginath, S, et al. Obstetrical outcomes of emergency compared with elective cervical cerclage. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017;30(14):1650–1654.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Pergialiotis, V, Bellos, I, Antsaklis, A, et al. Presence of amniotic fluid sludge and pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99(11):1434–1443.Google Scholar

Preterm Labour and Birth. NICE Guideline NG25, November 20, 2015, last updated August 2, 2019. Available at www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng25?unlid=9291036072016213201257. Accessed July 10, 2021.Google Scholar

Senarath, S, Ades, A, Nanayakkara, P. Cervical cerclage: a review and rethinking of current practice. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2020;75(12):757–765.Google Scholar

Shennan, A, Chandiramani, M, Bennett, P, et al. MAVRIC: a multicenter randomized controlled trial of transabdominal vs transvaginal cervical cerclage. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222(3):261.e1–261.e9.Google Scholar

(a) Brown, R, Gagnon, R, Delisle, MF. No. 373 – cervical insufficiency and cervical cerclage. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019;41(2):233–247.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Lim, KI, Butt, K, Nevo, O, et al. Guideline No. 401: sonographic cervical length in singleton pregnancies: techniques and clinical applications. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2020;42(11):1394–1413.Google Scholar

Sperling, JD, Dahlke, JD, Gonzalez, JM. Cerclage use: a review of 3 national guidelines. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2017;72(4):235–241.Google Scholar