260
Views
4
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Can sonographic measurements and changes in cervical length during pregnancy predict preterm labour in an asymptomatic low-risk population?

, , , &
Pages 2107-2112 | Received 23 Jun 2017, Accepted 07 Jan 2018, Published online: 18 Jan 2018

References

  • McCormick MC. The contribution of low birth weight to infant mortality and childhood morbidity. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:82–90.
  • Goldenberg RL, Rouse DJ. Prevention of premature birth. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:313–320.
  • Odibo AO, Ural SH, Macones GA. The prospects for multiple-marker screening for preterm delivery: does transvaginal ultrasound of the cervix have a central role? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19:429–435.
  • Crane JMG, Hutchens D. Transvaginal sonographic measurement of cervical length to predict preterm birth in asymptomatic women at increased risk: a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;31:579–587.
  • Heath VC, Southall TR, Souka AP, et al. Cervical length at 23 weeks of gestation: relation to demographic characteristics and previous obstetric history. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1998;12:304–311.
  • Owen J, Iams JD, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. What we have learned about cervical ultrasound. Semin Perinatol. 2003;27:194–203.
  • Van Den Hof M, Crane J. Ultrasound cervical assessment in predicting preterm birth. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2001;23:418–421.
  • Leitich H, Brunbauer M, Kaider A, et al. Cervical length and dilatation of the internal cervical os detected by vaginal ultrasonography as markers for preterm delivery: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;181:1465–1472.
  • Souka AP, Papastefanou I, Michalitsi V, et al. Cervical length changes from the first to second trimester of pregnancy, and prediction of preterm birth by first-trimester sonographic cervical measurement. J Ultrasound Med. 2011;30:997–1002.
  • Hassan SS, Romero R, Berry SM, et al. Patients with an ultrasonographic cervical length of ≤15 mm have nearly a 50% risk of early spontaneous preterm delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:1458–1467.
  • Antsaklis P, Daskalakis G, Pilalis A, et al. The role of cervical length measurement at 11–14 weeks for the prediction of preterm delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24:465–470.
  • Van Os MA, Kleinrouweler CE, Schuit E, et al. Influence of cut-off value on the prevalence of short cervical Length. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:330–336.
  • Guzman ER, Mellon C, Vintzileos AM, et al. Longitudinal assessment of endocervical canal length between 15 and 24 weeks’ gestation in women at risk for pregnancy loss or preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;92:31–37.
  • Conoscenti G, Meir YJ, D’Ottavio G, et al. Does cervical length at 13–15 weeks’ gestation predict preterm delivery in an unselected population? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:128–134.
  • Parra-Cordero M, Sepúlveda-Martínez A, Rencoret G, et al. Is there a role for cervical assessment and uterine artery Doppler in the first trimester of pregnancy as a screening test for spontaneous preterm delivery? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43:291–296.
  • Tsikouras P, Galazios G, Zalvanos A, et al. Transvaginal sonographic assessment of the cervix and preterm labor. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2007;34:159–162.
  • Berghella V, Roman A, Daskalakis C, et al. Gestational age at cervical length measurement and incidence of preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110:311–317.
  • Khalifeh A, Berghella V. Universal cervical length screening in singleton gestations without a previous preterm birth: ten reasons why it should be implemented. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214:603.e1–603.e5.
  • Barros-Silva J, Pedrosa AC, Matias A. Sonographic measurement of cervical length as a predictor of preterm delivery: a systematic review. J Perinat Med. 2014;42:281–293.
  • Carvalho MH, Bittar RE, Brizot ML, et al. Cervical length at 11–14 weeks’ and 22–24 weeks’ gestation evaluated by transvaginal sonography, and gestational age at delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:135–139.
  • Ozdemir I, Demirci F, Yucel O, et al. Ultrasonographic cervical length measurement at 10–14 and 20–24 weeks gestation and the risk of preterm delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007;130:176–179.
  • Conde-Agudelo A, Romero R. Predictive accuracy of changes in transvaginal sonographic cervical length over time for preterm birth: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:789–801.
  • Rozenberg P. Universal cervical length screening for singleton pregnancies with no history of preterm delivery, or the inverse of the Pareto principle. BJOG. 2017;124:1038–1045.
  • Fonseca EB, Celik E, Parra M, et al. Progesterone and the risk of preterm birth among women with a short cervix. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:462–469.
  • Hassan SS, Romero R, Vidyadhari D, et al. Vaginal progesterone reduces the rate of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38:18–31.
  • Temming LA, Durst JK, Tuuli MG, et al. Universal cervical length screening: implementation and outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214:523.e1–523.e8.
  • Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine. Progesterone and preterm birth prevention: translating clinical trials data into clinical practice. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206:376–386.
  • Spitz JL. Cervical length education and review [Internet]. [cited 2018 Jan 13]. Available from: https://clear.perinatalquality.org
  • Werner EF, Hamel MS, Orzechowski K, et al. Cost-effectiveness of transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening in singletons without a prior preterm birth: an update. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:554.e1–554.e6.
  • Einerson BD, Grobman WA, Miller ES. Cost-effectiveness of risk-based screening for cervical length to prevent preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215:100.e1–100.e7.
  • Khalifeh A, Quist-Nelson J, Berghella V. Universal cervical length screening for preterm birth prevention in the United States. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017;30:1500–1503.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.