title: Ultrasound-predicated versus history-predicated cerclage in women at risk of cervical insufficiency: a systematic review.
abstract: The aim of this systematic review was to compare pregnancy outcomes and cerclage-related complications of ultrasound-predicated versus history-predicated cerclage in patients at risk of cervical insufficiency due to a history of preterm delivery (PTD). A structured search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify potentially relevant articles from January 1980 through July 2007. Studies were included if ultrasound-predicated cerclage was compared to history-predicated cerclage in women with a singleton gestation and a history of PTD. The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane search yielded 537, 643, and 42 articles, respectively. In addition, 1194 "Related articles" (PubMed) and 87 "Cited in/cited by" (ISI-WOS) from all potentially relevant articles were assessed. After critical evaluation for relevance and quality, 6 articles remained. Five of the 6 included studies showed no differences in pregnancy outcome (PTD or pregnancy loss <24 weeks) between the ultrasound-predicated and the history-predicated cerclage groups. In 1 prospective cohort study, PTD below 30 weeks was significantly lower in the ultrasound group. The included studies showed that in the ultrasound group, 40% to 68% of the patients did not require cerclage. The majority of studies provided insufficient data to draw conclusions regarding cerclage-related complications. In conclusion, using ultrasound to identify women at risk of cervical insufficiency because of a history of PTD reduces cerclage rates and results in similar pregnancy outcomes as cerclage placement on the basis of history alone.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  After reading this article, the reader should be able to identify his or her own management of women with prior history of preterm delivery with respect to the possible use of cerclage, design a diagnostic strategy for his or her own patients to determine whether history or ultrasound-based decision making is appropriate in the practice setting, and translate best-practices with respect to definition of cervical shortening in his or her own practice.
authors.affiliation: Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Maria J C
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Blikman
authors.forename: Thuy-My
authors.initials: TM
authors.lastname: Le
authors.forename: Hein W
authors.initials: HW
authors.lastname: Bruinse
authors.forename: Geert J M G
authors.initials: GJ
authors.lastname: van der Heijden
mesh_terms: D023802:Cerclage, Cervical / Q000009:adverse effects*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D011247:Pregnancy; D011256:Pregnancy Outcome; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016216:Ultrasonography, Prenatal; D002581:Uterine Cervical Incompetence / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*