4.6 Article

Does transvaginal sonographic measurement of cervical length before 14 weeks predict preterm delivery in high-risk pregnancies?

期刊

ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
卷 21, 期 2, 页码 140-144

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/uog.28

关键词

cervix; first trimester; prediction; pregnancy; preterm birth; transvaginal ultrasonography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To determine whether high-risk patients manifest cervical length < 25 mm on transvaginal ultrasound before 14 weeks of gestation, and if this finding is predictive of preterm delivery. Methods Asymptomatic pregnancies at high risk for preterm birth were followed prospectively from 10 + 0 weeks to 13 + 6 weeks with transvaginal sonograpbic measurement of the cervix. A cervical length < 25 mm was considered a short cervix at this gestational age and at the follow-up ultrasound examinations, performed between 14 and 24 weeks. The primary outcome was preterm birth at < 35 weeks of gestation. Results One hundred and eighty-three pregnancies met the study criteria and were included in the analysis. Only 10 (5%) patients bad a cervix < 25 mm before 14 weeks. The sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of a short cervix were 14%, 97%, 50%, and 82%, respectively (relative risk, 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-5.6). The mean transvaginal sonograpbic cervical length before 14 weeks of gestation was 33.7 +/- 6.9 mm in pregnancies which delivered preterm (n = 36), and 35.0 +/- 6.8 mm in those delivering at term (n = 147) (P = 0.3). Follow-up transvaginal ultrasound examination of the cervix to 24 weeks revealed that the average gestational age at which a short cervix was detected was 18.7 +/- 2.9 weeks. Conclusion A cervical length < 25 mm on transvaginal sonograpbic assessment rarely occurs before 14 weeks even in high-risk patients destined to deliver preterm; in these patients cervical changes predictive of preterm birth develop mostly after this gestational age. Copyright (C) 2003 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据