These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: History-indicated cerclage: practice patterns of maternal-fetal medicine specialists in the USA.
    Author: Fox NS, Gelber SE, Kalish RB, Chasen ST.
    Journal: J Perinat Med; 2008; 36(6):513-7. PubMed ID: 18651834.
    Abstract:
    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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]