Cerclage for cervical shortening at fetoscopic laser photocoagulation in twin-twin transfusion syndrome

Ramesha Papanna, Mounira Habli, Ahmet A. Baschat, Michael Bebbington, Lovepreet K. Mann, Anthony Johnson, Greg Ryan, Martin Walker, David Lewis, Christopher Harman, Timothy Crombleholme, Kenneth J. Moise

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

13 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the benefit of cervical cerclage for cervical length ≤25 mm at the time of fetoscopic laser photocoagulation (FLP) for twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Study Design: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted with 163 patients with a short cervix before FLP for twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Seventy-nine of the patients (48%) had cerclage placement at the surgeon's discretion. The outcome measures that were compared were gestational age at delivery and perinatal mortality rates for patients with cerclage and those who were treated conservatively. Outcomes were evaluated with the use of comparative statistics. Results: There were no differences in the preoperative variables, except cerclage was performed more frequently for a cervical length of ≤15 mm (P <.001). There were no differences in the gestational age at delivery (28.8 ± 5.4 vs 29.1 ± 5.6 weeks with and without cerclage, respectively; P =.15); perinatal mortality rates were similar between the 2 groups. Conclusion: The benefit of cerclage for patients with short cervix before FLP remains questionable.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)425.e1-425.e7
JournalAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology
Volume206
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2012
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • cervical cerclage
  • short cervix
  • twin-twin transfusion syndrome

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cerclage for cervical shortening at fetoscopic laser photocoagulation in twin-twin transfusion syndrome'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this