Journal of perinatal medicine · 2008
History-indicated cerclage: practice patterns of maternal-fetal medicine specialists in the USA.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Fox Nathan S, Gelber Shari E, Kalish Robin B, Chasen Stephen T
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: There is limited evidence supporting the effectiveness of history-indicated cerclage in preventing spontaneous pregnancy loss or preterm birth. This study was undertaken to estimate the practice patterns of maternal-fetal medicine specialists in regards to history-indicated cerclage.
METHODS: We performed a mail-based survey of all SMFM specialists in the US. Subjects were asked whether they would recommend a history-indicated cerclage at 12-14 weeks in a patient whose prior pregnancy was her first pregnancy and ended in a spontaneous, painless loss at 19 weeks with no identifiable cause.
RESULTS: A total of 827 (46%) of SMFM members responded of which 75% would recommend a history-indicated cerclage for this patient. Twenty-one percent would not recommend one, but would place one if desired by the patient. Only 4% would not place a history-indicated cerclage in this scenario. A total of 71% believed a history-indicated cerclage was associated with moderate or significant benefit, and 89% believed it involved minimal or no risk. Female gender, non-academic practice, practicing in the southern region and greater interval since residency training were all independently associated with the recommendation for a history-indicated cerclage.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite limited level-I evidence supporting its use, a history-indicated cerclage is recommended by most maternal-fetal medicine specialists.
METHODS: We performed a mail-based survey of all SMFM specialists in the US. Subjects were asked whether they would recommend a history-indicated cerclage at 12-14 weeks in a patient whose prior pregnancy was her first pregnancy and ended in a spontaneous, painless loss at 19 weeks with no identifiable cause.
RESULTS: A total of 827 (46%) of SMFM members responded of which 75% would recommend a history-indicated cerclage for this patient. Twenty-one percent would not recommend one, but would place one if desired by the patient. Only 4% would not place a history-indicated cerclage in this scenario. A total of 71% believed a history-indicated cerclage was associated with moderate or significant benefit, and 89% believed it involved minimal or no risk. Female gender, non-academic practice, practicing in the southern region and greater interval since residency training were all independently associated with the recommendation for a history-indicated cerclage.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite limited level-I evidence supporting its use, a history-indicated cerclage is recommended by most maternal-fetal medicine specialists.