ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
The role of repeat cerclage in managing subsequent pregnancies for patients with a prior history of cervical cerclage: a retrospective self-control study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Risk factors for preterm birth and prolonged pregnancy following cervical cerclage in women with cervical insufficiency: a retrospective analysis and predictive model.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a woman who received cerclage in the previous pregnancy, obstetricians were highly likely to perform this surgery in her subsequent pregnancy. However, many researchers have advocated against the use of repeat cerclage. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of repeat cerclage in managing the subsequent pregnancy for participants with a history of cervical cerclage. We retrospectively collected data from patients who had a history of cervical cerclage and received repeat cerclage in the subsequent pregnancy. A self-controlled comparative analysis was undertaken to evaluate the differences in baseline characteristics and pregnancy outcomes between the initial cerclage and the repeat cerclage. A total of 173 patients were included in the study. These patients were divided into two groups, the initial cerclage group and the repeat cerclage group. Consequently, the gestational age at delivery, birth weight, live birth outcome, and neonatal morbidity in the repeat cerclage group were significantly improved compared to the initial cerclage group (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.