Transperineal versus transvaginal sonographic cervical length measurement in second- and third-trimester pregnancies

Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 657-662

  Meijer Hoogeveen, M ^a   Stoutenbeek, P ^a   Visser, G H A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cervix; Pregnancy; Techniques; Transperineal; Transvaginal; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY POSTURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; GESTATIONAL AGE; HIP; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE DISPLAY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; NORMAL HUMAN; PAIN; PARAMETER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SECOND TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; THIRD TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; TRANSPERINEAL ECHOGRAPHY; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UTERINE CERVIX LENGTH;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CERVICAL LENGTH MEASUREMENT; CERVIX UTERI; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; ORGAN SIZE; PAIN; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, SECOND; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, THIRD; REFERENCE VALUES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 55549084256     PISSN: 09607692     EISSN: 14690705     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/uog.4093     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Meijer-Hoogeveen M, Stoutenbeek P, Visser GH. Methods of sonographic cervical length measurement in pregnancy: A review of the literature. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2006; 19: 755-762.
2. To MS, Skentou C, Cicero S, Nicolaides KH. Cervical assessment at the routine 23-weeks' scan: problems with transabdominal sonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 15: 292-296.
3. Andersen HF. Transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasonography of the uterine cervix during pregnancy. J Clin Ultrasound 1991; 19: 77-83.
4. Mason GC, Maresh MJ. Alterations in bladder volume and the ultrasound appearance of the cervix. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 457-458.
5. Berghella V, Kuhlman K, Weiner S, Texeira L, Wapner RJ. Cervical funneling: sonographic criteria predictive of preterm delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997; 10: 161-166.
6. Carr DB, Smith K, Parsons L, Chansky K, Shields LE. Ultrasonography for cervical length measurement: agreement between transvaginal and translabial techniques. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96: 554-558.
7. Cicero S, Skentou C, Souka A, To MS, Nicolaides KH. Cervical length at 22-24 weeks of gestation: comparison of transvaginal and transperineal- translabial ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 17: 335-340.
8. Kurtzman JT, Goldsmith LJ, Gall SA, Spinnato JA. Transvaginal versus transperineal ultrasonography: a blinded comparison in the assessment of cervical length atmidgestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179: 852-857.
9. Owen J, Neely C, Northen A. Transperineal versus endovaginal ultrasonographic examination of the cervix in the midtrimester: a blinded comparison. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181: 780-783.
10. Ozdemir I, Demirci F, Yucel O. Transperineal versus transvaginal ultrasonographic evaluation of the cervix at each trimester in normal pregnant women. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2005; 45: 191-194.
11. Yazici G, Yildiz A, Tiras MB, Arslan M, Kanik A, Oz U. Comparison of transperineal and transvaginal sonography in predicting preterm delivery. J Clin Ultrasound 2004; 32: 225-230.
12. Eggebo TM, Gjessing LK, Heien C, Smedvig E, Okland I, Romundstad P, Salvesen KA. Prediction of labor and delivery by transperineal ultrasound in pregnancies with prelabor rupture of membranes at term. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006; 27: 387-391.
13. Carlan SJ, Richmond LB, O'Brien WF. Randomized trial of endovaginal ultrasound in preterm premature rupture of membranes. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 89: 458-461.
14. Tsoi E, Fuchs I, Henrich W, Dudenhausen JW, Nicolaides KH. Sonographic measurement of cervical length in preterm prelabor amniorrhexis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24: 550-553.
15. Yost NP, Bloom SL, Twickler DM, Leveno KJ. Pitfalls in ultrasonic cervical length measurement for predicting preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93: 510-516.
16. Bland JM, Altman DE. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-310.