OBJECTIVE: Earlier studies have indicated a potential link between dilatation and curettage (D&C) and subsequent preterm delivery, possibly attributed to cervical damage. This study examines outcomes in pregnancies subsequent to first-trimester curettage with and without cervical dilatation.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on women who conceived after undergoing curettage due to a first trimester pregnancy loss. Maternal and neonatal outcomes of the subsequent pregnancy were compared between two groups: women who underwent cervical dilatation before their curettage and those who had curettage without dilatation. The primary outcome assessed was the rate of preterm delivery at the subsequent pregnancy, and secondary outcomes included other adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Univariate analysis was performed, followed by multiple logistic regression models to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: Among the 1087 women meeting the inclusion criteria during the study period, 852 (78.4 %) underwent first-trimester curettage with cervical dilatation, while 235 (21.6 %) opted for curettage only. No significant maternal or neonatal different outcomes were noted between the study groups, including preterm delivery (5.5 % vs. 3.5 %, p = 0.16), fertility treatments, placental complications, and mode of delivery. However, deliveries following D&C were associated with higher rates of small for gestational age neonates (7.6 % vs. 3.8 %, p = 0.04). Multivariate analysis revealed that cervical dilation before curettage was not significantly linked to preterm delivery [adjusted odds ratio 0.64 (0.33-1.26), p = 0.20].
CONCLUSIONS: The use of cervical dilatation during a curettage procedure for first trimester pregnancy loss, does not confer additional risk of preterm delivery. Further studies are needed to reinforce and validate these results.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of cervical cerclage with spontaneous follow-up strategy on pregnancy duration and neonatal outcomes in women with visible or prolapsed fetal membranes.
METHODS: Patients who were referred to a single tertiary care centre between 1st January 2017 and 31st December 2022 were included in this comparative, retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into two groups, those undergoing cerclage and those followed with no-cerclage. The range of pregnancy weeks for cerclage is between 18th and 27+6 weeks.
RESULTS: A total of 106 cases were reviewed and nine were excluded. Based on shared decision making, cervical cerclage was performed in 76 patients (78.3 %) and 21 patients (21.6 %) were medically treated in no-cerclage group if there was no early rupture of the fetal membranes. The gestational age at delivery was 29.8 ± 6 [Median=30 (19-38)] weeks in the cerclage group and 25.8 ± 2.9 [Median=25 (19-32)] weeks in the no-cerclage group (p=0.004). Pregnancy prolongation was significantly longer in the cerclage group compared to the no-cerclage group (55 ± 48.6 days [Median=28 (3-138)] vs. 12 ± 17.9 days [Median=9 (1-52)]; p<0.001). Take home baby rate was 58/76 (76.3 %) in cerclage group vs. 8/21 (38 %) in no-cerclage group. In the post-24 week cerclage group the absolute risk reduction for pregnancy loss was 50 % (95 % CI=21.7-78.2).
CONCLUSIONS: Cervical cerclage applied before and after 24 weeks (until 27+6 weeks) increased take home baby rate in women with visible or prolapsed fetal membranes without increasing adverse maternal outcome when compared with no-cerclage group.

BACKGROUND: Preterm identification of cervical dilation in pregnant women leads to the application of emergency cervical cerclage with an expectation of achieving term delivery. However, this is not always feasible. Short- and long-term neonatal complications post-preterm birth pose a significant challenge. It is crucial to anticipate potential complications and understand the possibilities of postpartum development as they can be encountered. We aimed to evaluate the effect of the degree of cervical dilatation before ultrasound and physical examination-indicated cerclage in singleton pregnancies presenting with premature cervical dilatation with bulging fetal membranes (rescue cerclage) on subsequent neonatal outcomes.
METHODS: In this retrospective clinical study, over a 10-year period between January 2009 and January 2019, 72 singleton pregnancies undergoing rescue cerclage were included and divided into two groups according to pre-cerclage cervical dilatation: Group 1 (n = 33) and Group 2 (n = 39) with cervical dilatation ≤3 cm and >3 cm, respectively. Latency period for pregnancy prolongation, gestational age at delivery, birth weight, and neonatal morbidity and mortality were compared across the groups. Logistic regression was used to delineate the independent effect of cervical dilatation at cerclage placement on neonatal mortality.
RESULTS: Group 2 had a higher delivery rate at ≤28 weeks\' gestation (p = 0.007) and lower birth weight (p = 0.002) compared to Group 1, with an increased mean latency period in Group 2 (90 ± 55 days versus 52 ± 54 days, p = 0.005). The newborn intensive care unit (NICU) requirement, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), neonatal jaundice and sepsis, and retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) were more frequent in Group 2. Neonatal mortality rate was higher (52.6% versus 24.2%, p = 0.015) and intact survival was lower (23.1% versus 48.4%, p = 0.013) in Group 2, whereas rates of cerebral palsy (8% and 9%, respectively) were similar between the groups (p = 0.64).
CONCLUSIONS: Advanced cervical dilatation (>3 cm) during physical examination-indicated cerclage in singleton pregnancies is associated with earlier delivery, leading to increased neonatal morbidity and mortality when compared with pregnancies having lesser degrees of cervical dilatation at cerclage. However, short-term poor neurological outcomes seem comparable.

OBJECTIVE: Well-established clinical practice for assessing progress in labor involves routine abdominal palpation and vaginal examination (VE). However, VE is subjective, poorly reproducible and painful for most women. In this study, our aim was to evaluate the feasibility of systematically integrating transabdominal and transperineal ultrasound assessment of fetal position, parasagittal angle of progression (psAOP), head-perineum distance (HPD) and sonographic cervical dilatation (SCD) to monitor the progress of labor in women undergoing induction of labor (IOL). We also aimed to determine if ultrasound can reduce women\'s pain during such examinations.
METHODS: Women were recruited as they presented for IOL in three maternity units. Ultrasound assessments were performed in 100 women between 37 + 0 and 41 + 6 weeks\' gestation. A baseline combined transabdominal and transperineal scan was performed, including assessment of fetal biometry, umbilical artery and fetal middle cerebral artery Doppler, amniotic fluid index, fetal spine and occiput positions, psAOP, HPD, SCD and cervical length. Intrapartum scans were performed instead of VE, unless there was a clinical indication to perform a VE, according to protocol. Participants were asked to indicate their level of pain by verbally giving a pain score between 0 and 10 (with 0 representing no pain) during assessment. Repeated measures data were analyzed using mixed-effect models to identify significant factors that affected the relationship between psAOP, HPD, SCD and mode of delivery.
RESULTS: A total of 100 women were included in the study. Of these, 20% delivered by Cesarean section, 65% vaginally and 15% by instrumental delivery. There were no adverse fetal or maternal outcomes. A total of 223 intrapartum ultrasound scans were performed in 87 participants (13 women delivered before intrapartum ultrasound was performed), with a median of two scans per participant (interquartile range (IQR), 1-3). Of these, 76 women underwent a total of 151 VEs with a median of one VE per participant (IQR, 0-2), with no significant difference between vaginal- or Cesarean-delivery groups. After excluding those with epidural anesthesia during examination, the median pain score for intrapartum scans was 0 (IQR, 0-1) and for VE it was 3 (IQR, 0-6). Cesarean delivery was significantly associated with a slower rate of change in psAOP, HPD and SCD.
CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive transabdominal and transperineal ultrasound assessment can be used to assess progress in labor and can reduce the level of pain experienced during examination. Ultrasound assessment may be able to replace some transabdominal and vaginal examinations during labor. © 2024 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

OBJECTIVE: This research was done to compare obstetric pain, anxiety and cervical dilatation between an epidural analgesia group and a control group.
METHODS: Participants were assigned to the experimental or control group depending on their decisions for pain relief. Subjective / objective obstetric pain, anxiety level and cervical dilatation were measured and ANOVA was used for comparison of groups and paired t-test to make pre-post comparisons.
RESULTS: Homogeneity of pain, anxiety and cervical dilatation were assessed at the latent phase. Cervical dilatation was larger in the control group than the experimental group, at both the active and the transitional phase (F=22.9, p<.001; F=39.9, p<.001 respectively). The degree of pain and anxiety were not significantly different between the groups. Within the experimental group, subjective / objective pain and anxiety level were significantly lower postanalgesia compared to pre-analgesia in the active phase. All variables, except for sweating in the objective pain measurement, changed significantly at the transient phase.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this evidence-based research indicate that epidural analgesia while effective in relieving pain and anxiety may have an adverse effect on the cervix during labor stage I. Epidural analgesia should be used carefully during cervical dilatation in labor stage I.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing body of evidence that the presence and length of the purple line could represent a non-invasive method of estimating and determining labour progress.
OBJECTIVE: The primary outcome was to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis on the association between the purple line length and cervical dilatation in active labour. The secondary outcome was to determine the association between the purple line length and the fetal head descent, and to calculate the pooled mean length of the purple line at a cervical dilatation of 3-4 cm and at a cervical dilatation of 9-10 cm.
METHODS: We searched the Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Clinical Trials.gov and Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth\'s Trials Register databases from inception till March 25, 2023.
METHODS: We included observational studies of pregnant women in active first stage of labour who had their labour progress assessed with the use of regular vaginal examinations and who had the occurrence recorded and length of the purple line measured at the same time.
METHODS: Two reviewers independently evaluated study eligibility. We used the random effects and fixed effects model for meta-analysis.
RESULTS: There were six eligible studies included in the systematic review that reported on 982 women in total with the purple line appearing in 760 (77.3%) of cases. We found a moderate positive pooled correlation between the purple line length with cervical dilatation (r = +0.64; 95%CI: 0.41-0.87) and fetal head descent (r = +0.50; 95%CI: 0.32-0.68). For women either in spontaneous or induced labour, the pooled mean length of the purple line was more than 9.4 cm when the cervical dilatation was 9-10 cm, whereas it was more than 7.3 cm when the cervical dilatation was 3-4 cm.
CONCLUSIONS: The purple line is a non-invasive method that may potentially be used as an adjunct in labour progress assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of transvaginal cerclage in twin pregnancies with cervical shortening, and to narrow the threshold cervical length for transvaginal cerclage.
METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study and 177 twin pregnancies with asymptomatic cervical dilatation or cervical length of 15 mm or less between 16+0 and 25+6 weeks of pregnancy were included. Patients independently chose either transvaginal cerclage (n = 129) or no cerclage treatment (n = 48) after being consulted on the risk and potential benefit of transvaginal cerclage. The primary outcome measures were gestational age at delivery and neonatal survival rate.
RESULTS: Compared with the no cerclage group, the cerclage group exhibited a higher gestational age at delivery (32.1 ± 4.5 vs 28.3 ± 6.2 weeks, P < 0.001) and a higher neonatal survival rate (86.4% vs 47.9%, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that in twin pregnancies with cervical dilatation or cervical length less than 10 mm, the cerclage group had significantly higher gestational age at delivery (31.3 ± 4.6 vs 23.4 ± 4.3 weeks, P < 0.001) and a higher neonatal survival rate (123 [85.4%] vs 4 [9.1%], P < 0.001) than the no cerclage group, but in twins when cervical length was 10-15 mm, the two measures were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Transvaginal cerclage may provide benefits for twins when cervical dilatation or cervical length is less than 10 mm, but its efficacy might not extend to twins when the cervical length is 10-15 mm. Further evidence is needed to confirm the efficacy of transvaginal cerclage for twin pregnancies with a short cervix.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the level of agreement between ultrasound measurements to evaluate fetal head position and progress of labor by attending midwives and obstetricians after appropriate training.
METHODS: In this prospective study, women in the first stage of labor giving birth to a single baby in cephalic presentation at our Obstetric Unit between March 2018 and December 2019 were invited to participate; 109 women agreed. Transperineal and transabdominal ultrasound was independently performed by a trained midwife and an obstetrician. Two paired measurements were available for comparisons in 107 cases for the angle of progression (AoP), in 106 cases for the head-to-perineum distance (HPD), in 97 cases for the cervical dilatation (CD), and in 79 cases for the fetal head position.
RESULTS: We found a good correlation between the AoP measured by obstetricians and midwives (intra-class correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.89). There was a moderate correlation between the HPD (ICC = 0.75; 95% CI 0.68-0.82). There was a very good correlation between the CD measured (ICC = 0.94; 95% CI 0.91-0.96). There was a very good level of agreement in the classification of the fetal head position (Cohen\'s κ = 0.89; 95% CI 0.80-0.98).
CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound assessment of fetal head position and progress of labor can effectively be performed by attending midwives without previous experience in ultrasound.

The assessment of labor progress from digital vaginal examination has remained largely unchanged for at least a century, despite the current major advances in maternal and perinatal care. Although inconsistently reproducible, the findings from digital vaginal examination are customarily plotted manually on a partogram, which is composed of a graphical representation of labor, together with maternal and fetal observations. The partogram has been developed to aid recognition of failure to labor progress and guide management-specific obstetrical intervention. In the last decade, the use of ultrasound in the delivery room has increased with the advent of more powerful, portable ultrasound machines that have become more readily available for use. Although ultrasound in intrapartum practice is predominantly used for acute management, an ultrasound-based partogram, a sonopartogram, might represent an objective tool for the graphical representation of labor. Demonstrating greater accuracy for fetal head position and more objectivity in the assessment of fetal head station, it could be considered complementary to traditional clinical assessment. The development of the sonopartogram concept would require further undertaking of serial measurements. Advocates of ultrasound will concede that its use has yet to demonstrate a difference in obstetrical and neonatal morbidity in the context of the management of labor and delivery. Taking a step beyond the descriptive graphical representation of labor progress is the question of whether a specific combination of clinical and demographic parameters might be used to inform knowledge of labor outcomes. Intrapartum cesarean deliveries and deliveries assisted by forceps and vacuum are all associated with a heightened risk of maternal and perinatal adverse outcomes. Although these outcomes cannot be precisely predicted, many known risk factors exist. Malposition and high station of the fetal head, short maternal stature, and other factors, such as caput succedaneum, are all implicated in operative delivery; however, the contribution of individual parameters based on clinical and ultrasound assessments has not been quantified. Individualized risk prediction models, including maternal characteristics and ultrasound findings, are increasingly used in women\'s health-for example, in preeclampsia or trisomy screening. Similarly, intrapartum cesarean delivery models have been developed with good prognostic ability in specifically selected populations. For intrapartum ultrasound to be of prognostic value, robust, externally validated prediction models for labor outcome would inform delivery management and allow shared decision-making with parents.