Ultrasound approach for cervical length screening in preterm birth prevention - Not transabdominal

被引:11
|
作者
Khalifeh, Adeeb [1 ]
Berghella, Vincenzo [1 ]
机构
[1] Thomas Jefferson Univ, Sidney Kimmel Med Coll, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Maternal Fetal Med, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA
关键词
cervical length; prematurity; transabdominal; transvaginal; ultrasound; VAGINAL PROGESTERONE; DOUBLE-BLIND; WOMEN; SONOGRAPHY; PREGNANCY; RISK; MULTICENTER; SCAN;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajog.2016.07.019
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Preterm birth remains a major cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality. A short cervix is strongly associated with spontaneous preterm birth. Professional organizations support cervical length screening for singleton gestations with a prior spontaneous preterm birth and second-trimester cervical length measurements between 16-24 weeks. All interventions used to decrease the risk of preterm birth in women with a short cervix are based on clinical trials that used transvaginal cervical length measurement, but transabdominal ultrasound has been shown to correlate well with transvaginal measurement in some observational studies. Transvaginal cervical length measurement is more accurate and more reliably obtained than the transabdominal approach. Conversely, transabdominal ultrasound could have the advantage of ease of implementation and, in general, is perceived by patients to be associated with less discomfort. Currently, there is no randomized clinical study that compares head-to-head the effectiveness of transvaginal vs transabdominal ultrasound for preterm birth risk screening. This point/counterpoint article summarizes the pros and cons of the 2 ultrasound approaches and debates whether transvaginal ultrasound should be used exclusively or if transabdominal ultrasound can be incorporated in cervical length screening for prevention of preterm birth.
引用
收藏
页码:739 / +
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] TRANSABDOMINAL ULTRASOUND ASSESSMENT OF CERVICAL DILATATION IN PRETERM LABOR
    STOCK, A
    HAINES, CJ
    AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 1992, 32 (03): : 280 - 281
  • [33] Midtrimester transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening for spontaneous preterm birth in diamniotic twin pregnancies according to chorionicity
    Roman, Amanda
    Saccone, Gabriele
    Dude, Carolynn M.
    Ward, Andrew
    Anastasio, Hannah
    Dugoff, Lorraine
    Zullo, Fulvio
    Berghella, Vincenzo
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2018, 229 : 57 - 63
  • [34] Cost-effectiveness of transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening in singletons without a prior preterm birth: an update
    Werner, Erika F.
    Hamel, Maureen S.
    Orzechowski, Kelly
    Berghella, Vincenzo
    Thung, Stephen F.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 213 (04)
  • [35] Cost-effectiveness of transvaginal ultrasound cervical length screening in singletons without prior preterm birth: an update
    Hamel, Maureen
    Orzechowski, Kelly
    Berghella, Vincenzo
    Thung, Stephen
    Werner, Erika
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 212 (01) : S90 - S91
  • [36] Ultrasound Assessment of Cervical Length in the First Trimester of Pregnancy to Predict Preterm Birth
    Volkov, Valery G.
    Chursina, Olga V.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICINE, 2018, 8 (04) : 321 - 323
  • [37] Cervical Cerclage for the Prevention of Preterm Birth
    Owen, John
    Mancuso, Melissa
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2012, 39 (01) : 25 - +
  • [38] Cervical pessary and prevention of preterm birth
    Sentilhes, L.
    Descamps, P.
    Legendre, G.
    GYNECOLOGIE OBSTETRIQUE & FERTILITE, 2014, 42 (01): : 38 - 44
  • [39] Cervical cerclage in the prevention of preterm birth
    Simcox, Rachael
    Shennan, Andrew
    BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH IN CLINICAL OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2007, 21 (05): : 831 - 842
  • [40] Cost-effectiveness of cervical length screening to prevent recurrent preterm birth
    Miller, Emily
    Grobman, William A.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2011, 204 : S191 - S191