Is sonographic assessment of cervical length better than digital examination in screening for preterm delivery in a low-risk population?

References

• Heath VC, Southall TR, Souka AP, Elisseou A, Nicolaides KH. Cervical length at 23 weeks of gestation: prediction of spontaneous preterm delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 12: 312–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, Mercer BM, Moawad A, Das A, et al. The length of the cervix and the risk of spontaneous premature delivery. N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 567–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taipale P, Hiilesmaa V. Sonographic measurement of uterine cervix at 18–22 weeks’ gestation and the risk of preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 92: 902–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercer BM, Goldenberg RL, Das A, Moawad AH, Iams JD. The preterm prediction study: a clinical risk assessment system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174(6)1885–95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Mercer BM, Moawad AH, Meis PJ, Das AF, et al. Can low-risk women destined for spontaneous preterm birth be identified?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 184: 652–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson GM, Ludmir J, Bader TJ. The accuracy of digital examination and ultrasound in the evaluation of cervical length. Obstet Gynecol 1992; 79(2)214–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volumenie JL, Luton D, De Spirlet M, Sibony O, Blot P, Oury JF. Ultrasonographic cervical length measurement is not a better predictor of preterm delivery than digital examination in a population of patients with idiopathic preterm labor. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 117(1)33–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sergent F, Marpeau L. For transvaginal digital examination in obstetrics. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2005; 33(1–2)65–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rozenberg P. Intravaginal ultrasonography of the uterine cervix: hope in the campaign against premature births. J Radiol 1999; 80(5)421–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zlatnik FJ, Yankowitz J, Whitham J, Burmeister LF. Vaginal ultrasound as an adjunct to cervical digital examination in women at risk of early delivery. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2001; 51: 12–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matijevic R, Grgic O. Clinical examination and transvaginal sonograpy in mid trimester as potential screening tests for preterm labor. Preliminary results on low risk population. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2004; 16(Suppl 1)48
   Google Scholar
• Holcomb VL, Smeltzer JS. Cervical effacement: variation in belief among clinicians. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 78: 43–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Floyd WS. Cervical dilatation in the mid-trimester of pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1961; 18: 380–1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buekens P, Alexander S, Boutsen M, Blondel B, Kaminski M, Reid M. Randomised controlled trial of routine cervical examinations in pregnancy. Lancet 1994; 334: 841–4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassan SS, Romero R, Berry SM, Dang K, Blackwell SC, Treadwell MC, et al. Patients with an ultrasonographic cervical length < or =15 mm have nearly a 50% risk of early spontaneous preterm delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: 1458–67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hibbard JU, Tart M, Moawad AH. Cervical length at 16–22 weeks’ gestation and risk for preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96(6)972–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guzman ER, Walters C, Ananth CV, O'Reilly-Green C, Benito CV, Palermo A, et al. A comparison of sonographic cervical parameters in predicting spontaneous preterm birth in high-risk singleton gestations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18: 204–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• To MS, Skentou C, Liao AW, Cacho A, Nicolaides KH. Cervical length and funneling at 23 weeks of gestation in the prediction of spontaneous early preterm delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18(3)200–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaels WH, Montgomery C, Karo J, Temple J, Ager JA, Olson J. Ultrasound differentiation of the competent from the incompetent cervix: prevention of preterm delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986; 154: 537–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burger M, Weber-Rossler T, Willmann M. Measurement of the pregnant cervix by transvaginal sonography: an interobserver study and new standards to improve the interobserver variability. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997; 9: 188–93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zorzoli A, Soliani A, Perra M, Caravelli E, Galimberti A, Nicolini U. Cervical changes throughout pregnancy as assessed by transvaginal sonography. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84: 960–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berghella V, Tolosa JE, Kuhlman K, Weiner S, Bolognese RJ, Wapner RJ. Cervical ultrasonography compared with manual examination as a predictor of preterm delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177(4)723–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomez R, Galasso M, Romero R, Mazor M, Sorokin Y, Goncalves L, et al. Ultrasonographic examination of the uterine cervix is better than cervical digital examination as a predictor of the likelihood of premature delivery in patients with preterm labor and intact membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171(4)956–64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen J, Yost N, Berghella V, Thom E, Swain M, Dildy GA, et al. Mid-trimester endovaginal sonography in women at high risk for spontaneous preterm birth. JAMA 2001; 286: 1340–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol 1964; 24: 266–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blondel B, Le Coutour X, Kaminski M, Chavigny C, Breart G, Sureau C. Prediction of preterm delivery: is it substantially improved by routine vaginal examinations?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 162: 1042–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen HF, Nugent CE, Wanty SD, Hayashi RH. Prediction of risk for preterm delivery by ultrasonographic measurement of cervical length. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 163: 859–67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anotayanonth S, Subhedar NV, Garner P, Neilson JP, Harigopal S. Betamimetics for inhibiting preterm labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004; 18(4)CD004352
   Google Scholar