medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Ginecología y Obstetricia de México

Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2020, Number 02

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2020; 88 (02)

Gestational days gained with different cerclage techniques in patients with cervical incompetence

Ibarra-Fortes MA, Ortega-Martín del Campo E, Carrera-Lomas E, Stuht-López D, Stern-Colin NJ
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 71-79
PDF size: 196.70 Kb.


Key words:

Pregnancy, multiple, Cervical incompetence, Cerclage, cervical, Multiple gestations, Tocolytics agents, Body Mass Index, Uterine Cervical Incompetence, Antibiotics.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To report the experience in the practice of cerclages with prophylactic and therapeutic indication in patients with single or multiple pregnancy, with cervical incompetence. In addition, report the days of pregnancy gained, compare surgical techniques and cerclages in single and multiple gestations.
Materials and Methods: Retrospective, descriptive, comparative and crosssectional study carried out between January 2011 and January 2018. Inclusion criteria: patients who had a cerclage and the pregnancy ended in our unit. Study variables: age, BMI, pregnancies, abortions, days of gestation earned, days in which they were placed, weeks of gestation completed at the end of pregnancy, surgical time, medications (tocolytics and antibiotics), complications from the placement of the cerclage until the end of pregnancy. For the descriptive analysis the statistical package IBM SPSS (version 22) was used; the distribution was obtained with Student's t test, the Shapiro-Wilk normality test was applied and the variables with normal distribution were analyzed, comparatively, with ANOVA and those with abnormal distribution with the Kruskal-Wallis test.
Results: 37 cases were analyzed in which the placement of cerclage prolonged 116.14 ± 47.4 days gestation, with an average termination of pregnancy at 246.41 ± 26.54 days. The Shirodkar cerclage was superior: it extended gestation 134.69 days with the end of pregnancy at 36 ± 2 weeks.
Conclusions: In patients with cervical incompetence cerclages are an option to prolong pregnancy. The Shirodkar technique had higher safety margins until the end of pregnancy (more than 34 weeks). The behavior in multiple pregnancies is similar, so in case of cervical incompetence should be applied.


REFERENCES

  1. Brown R, et al. Cervical Insufficiency and Cervical Cerclage. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019; 41 (2): 233-47. doi:10.1016/j. jogc.2018.08.009

  2. Miller ES, et al. Outcomes after physical examinationindicated cerclage in twin gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211:46.e1-46.e5. doi:10.1016/j.ajog. 2014.03.034

  3. Suhag A, Berghella V. Cervical cerclage. Clinical Obstet Gyneacol. 2014;57:557-67.

  4. Feltovich H. Cervical Evaluation From Ancient Medicine to Precision Medicine. Obstet Gyneacol. 2017;0: 1-13. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002106

  5. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No.142: Cerclage for the management of cervical insufficiency. Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 123:372–9. doi:10.1097/01.aog.0000443276.68274.cc

  6. Conde-Agudelo, et al. Vaginal Progesterone is as Effective as Cervical Cerclage to Prevent Preterm Birth in Women with a Singleton Gestation, Previous Spontaneous Preterm Birth and a Short Cervix: Updated Indirect Comparison Meta-Analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 219 (1): 10-25. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.03.028.

  7. Romero R, et al. Vaginal progesterone for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a short cervix: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 218 (2): 161-80. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.11.576

  8. Boelig R, Berghella V. Current options for mechanical prevention of preterm birth. Seminars in Perinatology 2017; 41 (8): 452-60. doi:10.1053/j.semperi.2017.08.003

  9. Berghella V, et al. Transvaginal cervical cerclage: evidence for perioperative management strategies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 209:181-92. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ajog.2013.02.020

  10. Dahlke J, et al. Cervical Cerclage During Periviability Can We Stabilize a Moving Target?. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 127: 934-40. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001391

  11. Murillo C, et al. Protocolo: cerclaje uterino. Hospital Universitario Clinic Barcelona. 2018

  12. Han M, et al. The impact of cerclage in twin pregnancies on preterm birth rate before 32 weeks. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 2018; 1-9 doi: 10.1080/14767058.2018.1427719

  13. Menocal G, et al. Cerclaje de urgencia: experiencia institucional. Perinatol Reprod Hum 2001; 15:188-94.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2020;88