Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Jun;200(6):623.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.03.010. Epub 2009 Apr 19.

A randomized controlled trial of cervical scanning vs history to determine cerclage in women at high risk of preterm birth (CIRCLE trial).

Author information

1
Division of Reproduction and Endocrinology, Maternal and Fetal Research Unit, St. Thomas' Hospital, King's College London, London, UK.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

We sought to compare history-indicated placement of cervical cerclage based on history- vs ultrasound-indicated placement in women at risk of preterm birth.

STUDY DESIGN:

We conducted a randomized controlled trial of history-indicated cervical cerclage suture based on history (clinician preference) vs ultrasound (< 20 mm cervical length) indicated in women at increased risk.

RESULTS:

The incidence of the primary outcome, preterm delivery between 24(+0) and 33(+6) weeks, was similar: 19/125 (15%) in the history-indicated group vs 18/122 (15%) in the ultrasound-indicated group (relative risk [RR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.76). Those women randomized to the ultrasound-indicated arm were significantly more likely to receive a cerclage (32% vs 19%; RR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.07-2.47) and progesterone (39% vs 25%; RR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.06-2.25).

CONCLUSION:

Screening women at high risk with cervical ultrasound to determine cerclage placement results in more intervention but similar outcome compared with history-indicated placement.

Comment in

PMID:
19380124
DOI:
10.1016/j.ajog.2009.03.010
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center