ArticlePrzeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review2025
Pregnancy outcomes following history- and ultrasound-indicated cervical cerclage: a 10-year retrospective cohort study from a tertiary center.
Article in Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cervical cerclage is a method used to prevent preterm delivery in pregnant women diagnosed with cervical insufficiency or a short cervix. This study aimed to compare pregnancy outcomes between cervical cerclage procedures performed due to history- and ultrasound-based indications. Material and methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Perinatology of the University Hospital in Cracow, Poland, a tertiary healthcare center. The study included women with singleton pregnancies who underwent cervical cerclage placement and subsequently gave birth in our department between 2013-2023. Results: Among 136 participants, 89 (65.4%) received history-indicated cerclage, and 47 (34.6%) underwent an ultrasound-indicated procedure. No statistically significant differences were found regarding miscarriage rates (3.4% vs. 2.1%) or preterm birth rates before 32 (9.0% vs. 14.9%), 34 (11.2% vs. 14.9%), and 37 (22.5% vs. 38.3%) gestational weeks between the history- and ultrasound-indicated groups ( Conclusions: Pregnancy outcomes following history-indicated cervical cerclage are comparable to those of ultrasound-indicated procedures. Consequently, emphasis should shift from predominantly performing prophylactic procedures to systematic cervical length screening and selective cerclage placement in cases of cervical shortening. Cervical cerclage remains an effective intervention for prolonging pregnancy in women with cervical insufficiency and a short cervix.
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.