4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Cervical incompetence prevention randomized cerclage trial: Emergency cerclage with bed rest versus bed rest alone

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
Volume 189, Issue 4, Pages 907-910

Publisher

MOSBY, INC
DOI: 10.1067/S0002-9378(03)00718-X

Keywords

cervical incompetence; emergency cerclage; bed rest; randomized trial; preterm delivery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare preterm delivery rates and neonatal morbidity/ mortality rates for women with cervical incompetence with membranes at or beyond a dilated external cervical os that was treated with emergency cerclage, bed rest plus indomethacin, versus just bed rest. STUDY DESIGN: Women with cervical incompetence with membranes at or beyond a dilated external cervical os, before 27 weeks of gestation, were treated with antibiotics and bed rest and randomly assigned for emergency cerclage and indomethacin or bed rest only. RESULTS: Twenty-three women were included; 13 women were allocated randomly to the emergency cerclage and indomethacin group, and 10 women were allocated randomly to the bed rest-only group. Gestational age at time of randomization was 22.2 weeks in the emergency cerclage and indomethacin group and 23.0 weeks in the bed rest-only group. Mean interval from randomization until delivery was 54 days in the emergency cerclage and indomethacin group and 20 days in the bed rest-only group (P = .046). Mean gestational age at delivery was 29.9 weeks in the emergency cerclage and indomethacin group and 25.9 weeks in the bed rest-only group. Preterm delivery before 34 weeks of gestation was significantly lower in the emergency cerclage and indomethacin group, with 7 of 13 deliveries versus all 10 deliveries in the bed rest-only group (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Emergency cerclage, indomethacin, antibiotics, and bed rest reduce preterm delivery before 34 weeks compared with bed rest and antibiotics alone.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available