BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025
Cerclage Reinforcement Following Primary Cerclage Procedure for Prevention of Preterm Birth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Iyer Neel S, Patel Virali, Roman Amanda, Clarfield Lauren, Contag Stephen, Menzies Rebecca, Berghella Vincenzo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Transvaginal cerclage is an important intervention used to decrease the risk of preterm delivery.
OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of a reinforcing cerclage (RC) should the initial cerclage fail.
SEARCH STRATEGY: Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Medline, CINAHL and clinicaltrials.gov were searched from database inception through December 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All studies compare the use of RC to expectant management after initial cerclage placement to prevent preterm birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data following PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcomes were gestational age at delivery and preterm delivery rate before 37 weeks. Subgroup analyses examined outcomes by initial cerclage indication (history-indicated, ultrasound-indicated, and physical exam-indicated). Results were summarised as weighted mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with associated 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was measured using Higgins I2.
MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies (n = 440), comparing RC to no RC after initial cerclage failure, met inclusion criteria. Primary analysis showed delivery occurred 3.98 weeks earlier with RC (95% CI [-5.29, -2.67], p < 0.0001). The RC group had a higher preterm delivery rate before 37 weeks (RR 1.46, 95% CI [1.03, 2.06], p = 0.03). High heterogeneity (I2 > 80%) was noted, and all included studies were observational, increasing the risk of selection bias.
CONCLUSION: Placement of a RC following failure of an initial cerclage was associated with a reduced pregnancy latency and an increased risk for preterm delivery. Given the non-randomised nature of the available evidence and significant heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Reinforcing cerclage should only be considered within research settings.
OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of a reinforcing cerclage (RC) should the initial cerclage fail.
SEARCH STRATEGY: Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Medline, CINAHL and clinicaltrials.gov were searched from database inception through December 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All studies compare the use of RC to expectant management after initial cerclage placement to prevent preterm birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data following PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcomes were gestational age at delivery and preterm delivery rate before 37 weeks. Subgroup analyses examined outcomes by initial cerclage indication (history-indicated, ultrasound-indicated, and physical exam-indicated). Results were summarised as weighted mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with associated 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was measured using Higgins I2.
MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies (n = 440), comparing RC to no RC after initial cerclage failure, met inclusion criteria. Primary analysis showed delivery occurred 3.98 weeks earlier with RC (95% CI [-5.29, -2.67], p < 0.0001). The RC group had a higher preterm delivery rate before 37 weeks (RR 1.46, 95% CI [1.03, 2.06], p = 0.03). High heterogeneity (I2 > 80%) was noted, and all included studies were observational, increasing the risk of selection bias.
CONCLUSION: Placement of a RC following failure of an initial cerclage was associated with a reduced pregnancy latency and an increased risk for preterm delivery. Given the non-randomised nature of the available evidence and significant heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Reinforcing cerclage should only be considered within research settings.